Issue - meetings

23/01182/FUL - Allbar Sports, Trinity Lane, Hinckley

Meeting: 17/12/2024 - Planning Committee (Item 313)

313 23/01182/FUL - Allbar Sports, Trinity Lane, Hinckley pdf icon PDF 989 KB

Application for change of use from cinema (sui generis) to 40 one-bedroom apartments (use class C3) with associated car parking and landscaping.

 

Late items received after publication of main agenda:

 

National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) Revisions

 

Importantly, the revised wording of Paragraph 125(c) of the NPPF states [amendments in bold]:

 

“Planning decisions should give substantial weight to the value of using suitable brownfield land within settlements for homes and other identified needs, proposals for which should be approved unless substantial harm would be caused, and support appropriate opportunities to remediate despoiled, degraded, derelict, contaminated, or unstable land.”

 

In relation to Paragraph 11(d)(ii) of the NPPF (2024), key policy Paragraphs 84 (isolated homes) and 91 (main town centre uses) do not apply to this development.

The development provides a mix of affordable housing that meets identified local needs and so is in accordance with key policy Paragraph 66 (housing mix) of the NPPF (2024).

 

As highlighted by Paragraphs 8.5 and 8.59 of the Committee Report, the application site is within the identified settlement boundary of Hinckley in a sustainable location in transport terms. Therefore, the proposal is compliant with the sustainability ambitions of key policy Paragraphs 110 (sustainable travel) and 115 (assessing sites) of the NPPF (2024).

 

Paragraphs 8.32 and 8.56 of the Committee Report confirm that the scheme ensures that the existing building continues to contribute positively to the character and heritage significance of the Hollycroft Conservation Area, and the proposal does not result in any significant adverse impacts of the residential amenity of neighbouring residents or the future occupants of the scheme. As a result, the proposal is compliant with key policy Paragraphs 129 (making efficient use of land), 135 (criteria for achieving well-designed places) and 139 (balancing design considerations) of the NPPF (2024).

 

Given that the Council can no longer demonstrate a 5YHLS, further weight should be given to this application’s provision of 40 dwellings.

 

The revisions to the NPPF have altered the paragraph numberings referenced in the committee report. The paragraphs which have been revised in the latest edition of the NPPF, which have been included within the committee report are detailed below:

 

·                                            Paragraph 70 of the NPPF is now Paragraph 73.

·                                            Paragraph 205 of the NPPF is now Paragraph 212.

·                                            Paragraph 206 of the NPPF is now Paragraph 213.

·                                            Paragraph 212 of the NPPF is now Paragraph 219.

·                                            Paragraph 225 of the NPPF is now Paragraph 232.

 

Planning History

 

The application reference for the previous planning application within the site highlighted at Paragraph 4.1 of the Committee Report is incorrect. The application reference is 16/00503/FUL. The scheme was not determined and returned back to the Applicant on 29 March 2018 due to their failure to agree to an extension of time or to progress the application forward since 24 July 2017.

 

Conditions

 

On 04 December 2024, the Applicant submitted revised plans for the Proposed Site Plan, Proposed OS Plan and the Proposed Landscaping Layout to ensure Parking Bay 01 is 3m in width. In light  ...  view the full agenda text for item 313

Minutes:

Application for change of use from cinema to 40 one-bedroom apartments with associated car parking and landscaping.

 

Two objectors and the applicant spoke on this application.

 

Members expressed concern about the lack of parking provision on the site which would exacerbate the on-street parking problems in the area. It was moved by Councillor Bray and seconded by Councillor Allen that the application be deferred to allow for further discussion on parking provision. Upon being put to the vote, the motion was CARRIED and it was

 

RESOLVED – the application be deferred.