Agenda item

1.       The Committee considered a report (Agenda Item 4(3)) concerning Planning Application 24/01163/REG3 in respect of the proposal to change the usage for Laburnam from Age Concern class F2 to class E for WBC Staff Offices

2.       Ms Alice Attwood introduced the report to Members, which took account of all the relevant policy considerations and other material planning considerations. In conclusion the report detailed that the proposal was acceptable in planning terms and officers recommended that the Development Manager be authorised to grant planning permission subject to the conditions outlined in the main and update reports.

3.       The Chairman asked Mr Paul Goddard if he had any observations relating to the application and in summary Highways’ Officers had raised no objection to the application. Mr Goddard’s full representation can be found here: Eastern Area Planning Committee - 6th November 2024

4.       In accordance with the Council’s Constitution, Stacey Bradshaw, Gabrielle Mancini and Georgie Davis applicant/agent, addressed the Committee on this application.

Applicant Representation

5.       Ms Bradshaw, Ms Mancini and Ms Davis addressed the Committee. They stated that they did not wish to make a representation but were happy to answer any questions on the application.

Member Questions to the Applicant

6.       Members asked questions of clarification and were given the following responses:

·       There was a maximum of nine desk spaces, and the applicants stated that full capacity would only be used when there were team meetings, and the applicant stated that these would be infrequent.

·       There would be at least two duty staff present on site as well as drop ins from staff between client visits.

·       There would be eight confirmed parking spaces on site. The applicant stated that the current staff workplace had six parking spaces which had been sufficient.

·       The office would be staff only and would not be public facing.

·       There was no designated disabled parking space on site.

·       There was no designated bike storage on site. The applicant stated that there was a private garden with sheds that were available to use by staff where bikes could be stored.

Member Questions to Officers

7.       Members asked questions of clarification and were given the following responses:

·       Mr Goddard commented that Members would be able to include a condition that required a dedicated disabled parking space if it was felt it would be useful. Mr Goddard stated that normally, with a car park that had less than ten parking spaces, a disabled parking space was not requested. There was a ratio of 4% disabled car parking per car park, but it was noted that the car park in question was below the threshold of ten spaces. 

·       Mr Goddard stated that if an employee who required a disabled parking space worked at the location in the future, then it was possible that this could be looked into at that time. Councillor Janine Lews was of the view that it would be more appropriate to include a disabled space at the current time so that any future employee requiring use of it did not feel different or like they were requesting something additional. 

Debate

8.       Councillor Pemberton supported the application and noted the need for the inclusion of a disabled parking space. Councillor Pemberton noted that the change of use of the building would be a valuable use of the resource.

9.       Councillor Pemberton proposed to accept Officer’s recommendation and grant planning permission subject to the conditions listed in the main report and update report, and the addition of an additional condition requesting that there be at least one disabled parking space outside the building.

10.   Councillor Kander was concerned about restricting the space when it was not required and queried if there was a solution for this. Mr Till suggested an additional condition could be added that stated that the building should not be taken into use until a revised parking plan had been submitted, which showed a parking space that fulfilled the criteria for disabled access. Mr Goddard explained using a photo of the car park how a disabled parking space could be facilitated.

11.   Councillor Pemberton referred back to his proposal to accept Officer’s recommendation, which he requested be subject to the suggestion, set out by Mr Till, regarding the submission of a revised parking plan that included disabled access. This was seconded by Councillor Kander.

12.   The Chairman invited Members of the Committee to vote on the proposal by Councillor Pemberton, seconded by Councillor Kander, to grant planning permission. At the vote the motion was carried.

RESOLVED that the Development Manager be authorised to grant planning permission subject to the conditions in the main report, update report and additional condition below:

·       Within six months of the class E(g)(i) use commencing, details of vehicle parking spaces including one disabled accessible space for the Laburnam Centre (including surfacing arrangements and marking out) be submitted to the Local Planning Authority under a discharge of conditions application. The spaces shall be surfaced, marked out and provided in accordance with the approved details within three months of the date of approval of the discharge of conditions application. Thereafter the parking spaces shall be kept available for parking and manoeuvring of vehicles at all times.

Reason: To ensure the development is provided with adequate parking facilities, in order to reduce the likelihood of roadside parking that would adversely affect road safety and the flow of traffic and to improved inclusive parking. This condition is applied in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework and Policy CS13 of the West Berkshire Core Strategy 2006-2026.

·