Agenda item

Retrospective application for a second level basement and extended first level basement as well as change of use of the rear of the approved retail areas to office (B1a Use Class) and ground floor rear extensions to provide 1,412sqm of office floorspace. The application also includes the retention of retail frontages, changes to the internal layout of the retail floorspace and other minor shopfront alterations.

(Planning application number: P2019/0194/FUL)

In the discussion the following points were made:

·         Members were advised that the excavation of the additional basement level is a breach of the approved planning permission, hence the need to remedy the situation. Members were informed that applicant has been advised that any planning application for the retention of the lower basement level would need to be supported by extensive engineering information before its consideration.

·         The Planning Officer acknowledged that although the proposal would result in a reduction in retail floorspace in the Local Shopping Area which is inconsistent with DM Policy 4.6, the applicant has submitted relevant marketing evidence demonstrating lack of demand.

·         In response to a question on significant changes between the approved and proposed scheme, the Planning Officer noted its similarity in terms of residential space, however changes exist to the retail space.

·         With regard to the basement, the meeting was advised that the structural method statement submitted by the applicant has been verified by an appropriately qualified structural engineer. In addition, Members were advised that the construction of the basement is well considered and in accordance with good engineering practice.

·         The Planning Officer informed the meeting that the planning enforcement team had requested that applicants fulfil their financial obligation within 30 days of finalisation of the legal agreement.  Conditions also needed to be timed for compliance prior to occupation of the office space.

·         In response to questions as to why the applicant had proceeded with further works beyond the approved permission, the Planning Officer indicated that there appeared to the Applicant’s advisor to be some ambiguity on whether permission was required for basement evacuation as is the case of residential basement going further another level.

·         The applicants representative apologised for submitting a retrospective application, indicating that it was not intentional but based on advice which they acknowledge as not correct.

·         Members requested an informative to be included not approving the applicant carrying out a development without seeking planning permission.

Councillor Klute proposed a motion to grant planning permission and to include an informative as noted above. This was seconded by Councillor Woolf and carried.

RESOLVED:

That following consideration of the case officer’s report (the assessment and recommendations therein), the presentation to Committee, submitted representations and objections provided verbally at this meeting, planning permission be granted subject to the conditions and informatives set out in Appendix 1 of the officer report and subject to the prior completion of a Deed of Planning Obligation made under Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 securing the heads of terms as set out in Appendix 1 of the officer report.