Agenda and minutes

There were no apologies for absence.

To confirm, as a correct record, the minutes of the Planning Committee meetings held on 23 May 2024 and 13 June 2024.

The Chair, Councillor Chris Whately-Smith advised that there was a correction made to the minutes of the Planning Committee meeting, held on 23 May 2024, and Councillor Debbie Morris advised the Committee that the reference to parking in ‘the wooded area’ was changed to ‘The Woods’ in the minutes under item 23/1797/FUL - CEDAR HOUSE, SANDY LANE, NORTHWOOD. The Chair advised that the public minutes will also be updated to reflect this change.

With that correction to the minutes, the Committee approved the minutes of its meeting of 23 May 2024, and authorised the Chair to sign them as a correct record.

To receive any declarations of interest.

There were no declarations of interest.

Items of other business notified under Council Procedure Rule 30 to be announced, together with the special circumstances that justify their consideration as a matter of urgency. The Chair to rule on the admission of such items.

There were no items of urgent business.

This application seeks to remove Condition 2 of planning permission 14/1294/FUL which states:

The development hereby permitted, excluding Swan House, shall be used solely for purposes included in Class B1 of the Schedule of the Town and Country Planning (Use Classes) Order 1987 (as amended) and for no other purpose whatsoever without the prior permission in writing of the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: To ensure adequate planning control over further development having regard to the limitations of the site and neighbouring properties and in the interests of the visual amenities of the site and the area in general, in accordance with Policies CP1 and CP12 of the Core Strategy (adopted October 2011).

Recommendation

That Condition 2 is removed and that Planning Permission be granted.

Lauren Edwards, Senior Planning Officer advised that there was no update, and provided a brief summary of the application.

The building was originally approved in 1988, to which there was a condition requiring that the whole building only be used for B1 office purposes. In 2014 this condition was varied to remove the condition, but only so far as it related to Swan House, not Drake House. We have included references to Permitted Development Rights within the officer description of the development.

The attachment of the condition to the original 1988 permission would have effectively revoked the ability to benefit from any Permitted Development Rights that have pertained to any other use than was offices. Therefore, effectively it is a Permitted Development Rights condition removal, albeit that it does not specify exactly that it is the removal of Permitted Development Rights. However, that is the only part of the development which is up for discussion this evening is the removal of that condition, and not any other subsequent use.

Mr. Hosking spoke against the application.

Ms. Frost, planning agent spoke in support of the application, on behalf of the applicant.

A District Councillor spoke on the item, proposing additional conditions to be added to the application.

A Parish Councillor also spoke against the application on behalf of Batchworth Community Council.

The officer reiterated that this application is seeking the removal of a condition. Officers are only able to assess the harm arising from the removal of a condition, in this case the building not being in office use. Officers are not able to consider any other material planning considerations of an alternative use that isn’t proposed at this time. Only harm, that would arise from it not being an office, for which the officer report sets out in full why that is acceptable.

The legislation does allow for alternative conditions to be added but officer don’t consider that to be reasonable at this time.

Members raised concerns regarding the challenges associated with the conversion of office blocks into residential accommodation, highlighting the dissatisfaction with the resulting living spaces that has been seen in other cases within the district. Members also talked about the lack of local planning authority control, due to rights granted by central government. Members expressed their discomfort with the existing legal framework that limits imposing conditions contrary to national legislation, and concerns about justifying actions that contradict the established legal framework.

Further points were raised by Members highlighting the necessity of controlling and imposing conditions on future residential development projects. Members emphasised the importance of ensuring adequate car parking, pedestrian access, waste management, crime prevention measures and affordable housing in such developments. It was questioned why it would be unreasonable to attach conditions to achieve the best outcomes for future residential projects.

The officer explained that additional conditions are not a consideration for this evening. Should a prior approval application be made, it would have to go through the relevant parts of the prior approval process, which  ...  view the full minutes text for item PC32/24

This application seeks full planning permission for the variation of Condition 3 (Windows) pursuant to planning permission 94/234/8 to include alterations first floor fenestration contained within the north and south elevations of the dwelling.

Condition 3 of planning permission 94/234/8 stated the following:

The new windows in the North and South upper side elevations shall be installed as fixed light, non-opening windows with the upper fanlights only hinged. These windows shall be wholly glazed in obscure glass and these requirements shall be incorporated as part of the works when constructed. Thereafter these upper side windows shall be permanently retained and maintained as such, for so long as they are required to remain.

Reason: In the interests of the amenities and privacy of the occupiers of adjoining residential properties and the occupier of the property the subject of this permission.

Recommendation: That condition 3 (Windows) be VARIED and that PLANNING PERMISSION IS GRANTED.

Lauren Edwards, Senior Planning Officer advised that there was no update on the application.

  Mr. Knight spoke against the application.

In response to questions raised by Members of the Committee regarding the obscure glazing of the windows in question, the officer clarified that when the applicant originally replaced the windows, shown on the images, they were both fitted with clear glass with top opening windows. Upon the commencement of an enforcement investigation, the applicant changed the bottom panes to obscure glaze, but the top panes remained clear glazed.

The officer confirmed that, for reasons set out in the report, it is considered acceptable to solely have the bottom half of the windows obscured.

The officer proceeded to demonstrate to the Committee the height of the locking mechanism of the top opening of the window, being at 1.9 meters, and the perspective from which the photographs of the window were taken. The first photograph taken at eye level of the officer with a height of 1.72 meters, and the second photograph, which was taken by the officer above her head.

Members found the demonstration of the officer regarding the viewing perspective from a window, highlighting the difference in perception when standing at different heights very helpful.

The officer clarified that the second window, at ground floor level, does also breach the condition as both panes are clear glazed. However, it overlooks the frontage of the neighbouring property. Therefore, the officer is of the view that it is acceptable to be fully clear glazed. The first floor window on the other side of the property is effectively compliant with the original condition, save for the fact that the top fanlight is clear glazed. Otherwise, its size, proportion and sighting are in accordance with the condition. The only part that breaches the condition is the clear glazed top pane.

Councillor Sara Bedford moved, seconded by Councillor Harry Davies that Condition 3 (Windows) be VARIED and that PLANNING PERMISSION IS GRANTED.

On being put to the Committee the motion was declared CARRIED by the Chair, the voting being by general assent.

There were no items of other business.