Agenda item

Alterations to elevations of existing car park building to enclose upper floor for commercial use (Class E), including brickwork and windows; associated works including new ramp and staircase; and landscaping alterations at Trinity Court, Church Street, Rickmansworth.

Recommendation: that planning permission be granted subject to conditions.

The application was for alterations to elevations of existing car park building to enclose upper floor for commercial use (Class E), including brickwork and windows; associated works including new ramp and staircase; and landscaping alterations at Trinity Court, Church Street, Rickmansworth.

The Planning Officer reported that a query had been raised in advance of the committee meeting regarding an earlier permission at the site.  Clarification was provided that the wider site was subject to a separate prior approval permission for the conversion of the three-storey office building to 38 residential flats, although this permission had not been implemented.  The application now before the committee had been assessed on its own merits and against the existing situation of the three-storey building still being in office use.  Officers considered that, should the application be approved, both permissions could in theory be implemented; however, condition one of the prior approval permission would be breached.  This condition related to the layout and provision of car parking across the site, as some of the parking provision would be lost through the proposed conversion of the car park to commercial space under this application.  To regularise this, the prior approval permission would need to be the subject of a variation of condition application.  As stated in the officer report, if the development were proposed to be implemented under the existing circumstances of the three-storey building being retained in office use, this would result in a total over-supply of five car parking spaces across the whole site.  The adopted parking standards dictated that the existing office use should provide 83 car parking spaces.  If the building were to be converted to residential use, total demand for car parking spaces would be 70.  This meant that the demand for parking, if the prior approval permission were implemented, would be less.  Officers were therefore of the opinion that if both schemes were implemented, an attempt to regularise condition one would be likely to be subject to objection by the local planning authority.

Parish Councillor Diana Barber of Batchworth Community Council spoke against the application.

Points raised by the speaker against the application included: the proposal involved a change of use and should be refused; the proposal would result in a building which would be highly dominant and overwhelm the street scene; consideration was needed to the context of the surroundings of the Batchworth Lock corridor; the proposal conflicted with the Batchworth Neighbourhood Plan; there was a diminishing demand for commercial space and a general over-supply in the area so that the proposal would not contribute to the economic development of the locality; and there were concerns about contamination following many years of use by motor vehicles.

In response to the points raised by the speaker against the proposal, the Planning Officer confirmed that most of the issues raised had been addressed in the report.  Whilst it was acknowledged that the appearance of the building would be altered from its current form, details of materials were conditioned to be supplied and it was not considered that there would be any resulting harm.  The historic use of the car park, and the historic wider use of the site, meant that contamination was possible; for this reason, measures to address contamination prior to works commencing and requirements for ongoing monitoring would be conditioned.

Committee Members asked questions about the details of the application which were responded to by officers.  The Committee’s discussions included the following:

·         In response to a question, the Planning Officer explained the reasons for the condition which restricted use to Classes E (c), (d), (e) and (g), as set out it paragraph 7.1.8 of the report.  Some sub-categories of Use Class E had been excluded on the grounds of not being compatible with, or appropriate for, the site location.  Any remaining sub-categories which were not considered to be incompatible were permitted within the condition.  In debate, a Committee Member recommended that the sub-categories of Class E which were permitted should be as broad as possible, and that Class E(f) should be added so that the building could also be used as a crèche, day nursery or day centre.

·         The Planning Officer confirmed that the proposal included provision for a bin store, and that no changes were proposed with regard to the existing parking arrangements other than the removal of 22 parking spaces on the upper floor level of the car park.

The applicant spoke in favour of the application.

Points raised by the speaker in favour of the application included: the initial plan for the development was to try to get the building fully occupied by commercial tenants, as there were existing clients with tenancies which ran for the next five years.  Thereafter, there may be potential to create a larger business centre; the proposal would provide high grade small office space for smaller and medium-size businesses; the development would provide cycle storage and would also improve the current arrangement with regard to bin storage.

Councillor Morris moved, and Councillor Gazzard seconded, that planning permission be granted subject to conditions and amendment to Condition 4 to include reference to Use Class E(f).  On being put to the vote this was carried, the voting being unanimous.

RESOLVED:

That planning permission be granted subject to conditions and amendment to Condition 4 to include reference to Use Class E(f).