Agenda item

Application Type:     Full Planning Permission

Proposal:                   Change of use of existing garage and adjoining lean-to from residential to commercial use as vehicle service and repair workshop         

Application Type: Full Planning Permission.

Proposal: Change of use of existing garage and adjoining lean-to from residential to commercial use as vehicle service and repair workshop.    

Location: 117 Woodville Road, Boston, Lincolnshire PE21 8BT.

The Chairman opened the item by welcoming Members and members of the public to the meeting. He introduced the application and invited officers to present the report.

The Senior Planning Officer presented the application, confirming that it sought permission for the change of use of an existing residential garage to commercial use as a vehicle service and repair workshop. The Committee was provided with information about the site location and context. The property lay within a residential area with nearby residential properties in close proximity. The Senior Planning Officer described the site layout, including the main garage for mechanical repairs and the lean?to section for waste storage, and confirmed that no external alterations were proposed. Photographs of the site were shown, illustrating the relationship with neighbouring dwellings and the single?width driveway access.

Members were advised that Environmental Health had submitted a formal objection. Although the applicant had proposed mitigation measures relating to noise and odour, Environmental Health considered that the activity was inappropriate in a residential environment and would be better located in a commercial setting. Lincolnshire County Council highways had initially raised concerns regarding vehicle movements but, following clarification that the use would be operated on an appointment?only basis by a single mechanic, they confirmed that they had no objection. The Committee was informed that three letters of support had been received from adjoining neighbours; however, officers advised that the site was not currently operated at the level envisaged by the application and that the amenity of future neighbours required protection. The Senior Planning Officer concluded that the proposal significantly conflicted with policies relating to future residential amenity and recommended refusal.

Three public speakers addressed the Committee. Patricia Green, a neighbour, spoke in support of the application, stating that she lived very close to the garage and had never experienced any issues with noise, disturbance or parking from the minor work already taking place. She explained that she worked night shifts and often slept during the day with windows open and had never been disturbed. She added that neighbouring residents had also submitted letters of support and no objections had been raised. She considered the proposal to be small?scale, carefully limited, and beneficial to the community.

The applicant, Charlotte Lenton, then addressed the Committee. She explained that the proposal was a change of use of a garage to allow her husband to run a one-person micro-business from their garage, which would be used exactly as it currently stood. She stated that the garage had historically served as a small haulage firm and that the wider area already comprised mixed uses, including shops and a vets. She confirmed there had been no complaints in the six years they had lived at the property and highlighted that three adjacent neighbours supported the application. She referred to a Freedom of Information request showing that five similar garages in residential areas had generated no noise or odour complaints over five years. She emphasised that the Local Plan did not prohibit small?scale employment uses within settlements and that all work would be controlled through conditions.

Councillor Mike Gilbert, Ward Member, also spoke in support. He explained that he had reviewed historical maps from the 1960s and undertaken two site visits and believed that the area had a past commercial association. He considered the building suitable for the proposed use, noting that health and safety matters had been adequately addressed and that the conditions offered by the applicant would provide sufficient safeguards for the local community. In accordance with protocol, he left the meeting at the conclusion of his representation.

During debate, Members considered the balance of issues presented by the Senior Planning Officer and the public speakers. They acknowledged the objection from Environmental Health and the officer assessment that the proposal introduced a commercial activity into a residential setting.

Members also noted the support of adjoining neighbours, the absence of any complaints, and the mitigation measures proposed by the applicant. Several Members highlighted the community benefits of supporting small local businesses. Officers reiterated Environmental Health’s concerns, including the potential difficulty of monitoring and enforcing conditions, but Members considered that conditions could be applied to adequately regulate the use.

A motion to approve the application, contrary to officer recommendation, was moved by Councillor David Middleton and seconded by Councillor Claire Rylott, and the Committee voted in favour

Resolved:

That planning permission be granted, subject to delegation to officers to agree appropriate conditions with the applicant and Ward Members, including conditions relating to hours of operation, noise and odour management, limits on vehicle numbers and employees, requirements concerning external working, and noise levels.