Decision details

To approve application P/VOC/2021/03367 for a temporary period up to 31 December 2022 and subject to conditions as set out in the officer’s report.

The application relates to Unit 2, Lyme Regis Industrial Estate, Uplyme Road, Lyme Regis, DT7 3LS. The application is for Change of use from B1 to E(d) (formerly use class D2) to allow the building to be used as a fitness centre (without compliance to condition 4 of planning approval WD/D/14/002435 - restriction on business hours).

This decision was taken by myself, in my role as nominated officer, during the Western and Southern Area Planning Committee meeting on 6 January 2022. The decision was taken under arrangements which were put in place following the full Council meeting held on 4 May 2021. At this full Council meeting, it was agreed that all Council meetings that are not executive in nature would continue to be held virtually, with committee members expressing a ‘minded to’ decision, and with specific officers (including service managers) being authorised to exercise delegated powers to make decisions in light of the ‘minded to’ decisions expressed by members. These arrangements were subsequently extended by decision notices issued by the Chief Executive on 22 July 2021 and 4 October 2021.

This application was considered by the Western and Southern Area Planning Committee on 6 January 2022. The committee resolved that is was ‘minded to’ approve the application, subject to conditions. I concur with the committee’s ‘minded to’ resolution, and in my view the application should be approved, for the reasons set out in the officer’s report for the application.

The reasons for this decision can be summarised as follows:

This is an existing established fitness centre which provides employment and a public benefit in terms of assisting people’s health and fitness. There are residential properties in the vicinity and consequently it is expedient to exercise some caution over removing the days and hours restriction. The option of a temporary 1-year unrestricted permission is considered a sensible way forward.

The alternative option would be to refuse the planning application, contrary to the ‘minded to’ resolution of the Western and Southern Area Planning Committee. The report to full Council on 4 May 2021, which introduced the ‘minded to’ arrangements, sets out that “an officer should only make a decision contrary to the ‘minded to’ view of members for clear and compelling reasons and if the decision cannot reasonably be deferred until a time when it can be made by Councillors”. In this case, I consider that planning permission should be granted for the reasons set out in the officer’s report and I am not aware of any clear and compelling reasons to differ from the committee’s ‘minded to’ resolution. The alternative option of refusing the application contrary to the committee’s ‘minded-to’ resolution would not be appropriate in this case.

No declarations of interest were made by any of the committee members who took part in the debate.