Issue - items at meetings - Application for Exemption from Office to Residential Permitted Development Rights

Report of the Strategic Director; Place (copy attached).

That the Committee approves and endorses the area specific application and case made for exemption from office to residential permitted development rights that has been submitted to the Secretary of State to meet the required deadline.

73.1    The Committee considered a report of the Strategic Director, Place detailing arrangements for a new permitted development right being introduced by central government in spring 2013, which would allow changes of use from office (B1a) to residential use without requiring planning permission.

73.2    The Head of Planning and Public Protection stated that in view of the deadline for response to the Government the city council had submitted a case for exemption from this permitted development right in identified areas of the city due to the potential impact on businesses and jobs in the city. The report sought endorsement of the application which had been submitted to the Secretary of state to meet the government’s deadline of 22 February 2013. The decision to apply had been based on concerns relating to potential impact of office to residential permitted development rights on the supply of offices in key areas in the city and the impact it will have on the strategy underpinning the City Plan. A number of options have been considered relating to the geographical area covered by the exemption application. The areas have been decided on the basis of the evidence provided and the requirement of the government to keep the area of exemption to ‘the smallest area necessary’.

73.3    Councillor Hawtree commended the report stating that the case for the action taken was clearly set out in the report. Councillor Mac Cafferty concurred in that view stating that he considered it was important to have a series of exempt areas rather than to have a blanket exemption it was important for there to be clarity regarding future developments across the city and to balance the need for employment and the need for residential accommodation. There were instances where the Committee had sent a clear message to developers regarding their expectations in relation to particular sites and where as a consequence the developers had re-submitted a significantly improved scheme.

73.4    Councillor Morgan supported the approach being taken which represented a balanced approach in a difficult financial climate. Councillor C Theobald agreed that a balanced approach was needed.

73.5    Councillor Brown stated that whilst generally supporting the approach taken she could see could also see the arguments for the approach being taken by the government. It was very important in her view to balance all of the needs identified. Whilst she was in agreement with the inclusion of the city centre, she was not convinced that it was appropriate for some of the other areas cited to have been included.

73.6    Councillor Janio stated that he was unable to support the action taken, as he considered that the “market” decided the viability and need for certain uses in certain areas. In his view there was a need for quality rather than quantity and for the creation of more “quality” jobs within the city particularly allied to technology. He would be voting against the recommendation.

73.7    Councillor Smith stated that he supported the approach being taken considering that it was important to support the provision and retention of hotels within the central core area and supporting small business uses where that was appropriate.

73.8    Councillor J Kitcat, Leader of the Council stated that in his view the approach adopted simply sought to keep development control within control of the local planning authority/Committee and would enable  decisions to be made on the basis of the  applications which came forward for consideration.

73.9    Councillor Bowden, the Chair referred to the duty placed upon the Council to work with neighbouring authorities in relation to housing provision, approaches had been made by the Council’s neighbours butt had yet to bear fruit.

73.10  A vote was taken and on a vote of 9 to 1 the Committee agreed to the recommendation set out below.

73.11  RESOLVED - That the Committee approves and endorses the area specific application and case made for exemption from office to residential permitted development rights that has been submitted to the Secretary of State to meet the required deadline.

                        Note : Councillor Janio wished his name to be recorded as having voted against the recommendation.