Minutes:
The proposal before Members was for alterations to the existing car park layout and provision of additional car parking on adjacent land to serve the existing foodstore, together with reinstatement of the former community allotment on the remainder of adjacent land, and associated landscaping and works.
The application had previously been presented to the Regulatory Services Committee of 15 September 2016.
During the previous debate Members discussed the proposed works and the benefits they would bring to the area. The report recommended that planning permission be refused however following a motion to approve planning permission it was resolved to delegate to the Head of Regulatory Services to grant planning permission, contrary to recommendation, subject to conditions and the prior completion of a legal agreement to cover:
- A clause requiring reversion of site to Green Belt open land on cessation of car park use by Aldi
- £12,000 financial contribution to nearby public open space
- plus imposition of conditions to be decided by the Head of Regulatory Services but to include a maintenance scheme for the meadow area in perpetuity. The application was to be re-presented to the Committee for determination in the event that the legal agreement could not be satisfactorily negotiated.
The application was being brought back before the Committee as the applicant has queried the reasonableness of the clause requiring the reversion of the site to Green Belt open land and the linkage to Aldi and did not consider it necessarily reflected the nature of the debate and issues raised by Members at the meeting. The applicant had argued that the clause was not necessary as the land would remain in Green Belt use and that planning permission would be required for all future development so the use as a car park should not present a greater risk of further development in the Green Belt in the future.
Officers had accepted that the site would remain in the Green Belt and that further forms of development would require planning permission. However did not agree with the applicant in terms of the potential pressure for allowing further development on the site, given that it would become previously developed land, albeit within the Green Belt.
It was officers understanding that Members wanted a clause requiring the land to be returned to undeveloped land in the event of the cessation of the use of the car park. The report had been brought back to the Committee for Members to provide clarity on the intention of the clause in question and for Members to consider if, in fact, it was necessary for the site to be reverted to undeveloped land when the car park was no longer required.
With its agreement Councillor Jason Frost addressed the Committee.
Councillor Frost commented that the land remained in the Green Belt and that any subsequent change to the land would require planning permission.
Following a brief debate in which Members sought and received clarification as to the possible future use of the land and possible restrictions it was RESOLVED to delegate to the Assistant Director of Regulatory Services to go back to applicant to seek their agreement to completing a Section 106 agreement with an amended clause requiring the physical reversion back to undeveloped land, including the removal of any hardstanding, on cessation of the car park use for retail purposes and subject to their completion to grant planning permission subject to planning conditions to be determined by the Assistant Director of Regulatory Services. If the legal agreement was not completed as above then officers would refuse planning permission as per the original recommendation.