Agenda item

Prior Approval Application for the change of use of Bridge House, Riverview House and Waterside House from office accommodation (Class B1) to 237 residential units (15 x Studio and 224 x 1-Bed) together with ancillary car parking, cycle storage and waste and recycling storage.

Recommendation: That delegated powers be given to the Head of Planning and Enforcement to confirm Prior Approval is not required.

RESOLVED: That the application was approved subject to conditions.

It was highlighted that this was a prior approval application therefore the Committee's powers were considerably restricted and only limited matters could be considered namely transport and highway impacts; contamination risks on site; flooding risks; impact of noise. The Head of Planning introduced the report and highlighted the addendum stating that it applied to three office buildings - Bridge House which Members had dealt with previously; together with Riverview House and Waterside House to the rear. The proposal was to convert the 3 buildings to 239 units and to provide 359 parking spaces. The Head of Planning and Enforcement explained that there were no risks regarding flooding, noise or contamination therefore transport and highway issues were the key matters for consideration. It was explained that a comprehensive Section 106 agreement was proposed which included a contribution of up to £500,000 which related to works identified through a transport appraisal and modelling together with a public realm contribution of £825,000 which would sweep up pedestrian and cycle issues. The Highways Officer had explained that he believed these contributions would address all highways matters. It was also explained that the Council were looking to bring in an Article 4 direction and until that came into play the Committee could not bring into account any matters related to the Council's position in terms of wishing to protect employment land. Attention was also drawn to the addendum and an additional head of term A 3 was highlighted regarding parking spaces.

Members queried the wording which stated that prior approval was not required. Councillors also requested clarification regarding the issues of transport and noise as there were concerns about both so controls were in place and yet prior approval was not required. Members wished to understand why they were being asked to approve something for which prior approval was not required. The Head of Planning and Enforcement explained that, with prior approval, conditions and legal agreements could be added in some cases if required. The Legal Advisor confirmed that the wording of the recommendation should be amended to reflect the fact that prior approval would be granted subject to the conditions and the section 106 agreement. The Legal Advisor highlighted that whether prior approval is required is dependent on the Class of the General Permitted Development Order 2015. Class O of the General Permitted Development Order 2015 requires a two stage process. It was therefore agreed that authority be delegated to the Head of Planning and the Legal Advisor to agree the wording.

Members requested confirmation of the existence of charging points for electric vehicles but officers advised that we cannot request this. Councillors also asked for clarification regarding the 200 additional parking spaces and whether this land could be built on in the future. Officers confirmed that any work on this land would have to go through the normal planning application procedure and be dealt with accordingly.

Members moved, seconded and approved the application subject to delegated authority to the Head of Planning and the Legal Advisor to revise the wording. Seven Members voted in favour with one absention.

RESOLVED: That the application was approved subject to delegated authority being passed to the Head of Planning and the Legal Advisor to revise the wording.