Agenda item

As noted in the Declarations of Interest under agenda item 3 (Minute No45), During consideration of this agenda item, Councillors Bill Hartnett and Jen Snape declared an interest in that they were Rubicon Board Members. Both Members left the room and took no part in the voting thereof.

The application was being reported to the Planning Committee because the application required the removal of a Section 106 (S106) Agreement. Therefore, the application fell outside the scheme of delegation to Officers.

Officers presented the report and in doing so, drew Members’ attention to the presentation slides on pages 19 to 24 of the Site Plans and Presentations pack.

The application was for 2 Grove Street, Redditch, B98 8DX and sought the removal of the S106 agreement attached to the planning permission 2004/066/FUL.

Officers detailed to Members the location shown in red on page 20 of the Site Plans and Presentations pack, it was further clarified that before Members was not a planning application but an application to remove the Section 106 agreement from the planning permission 2004/066/FUL.

The S106 agreement covered three areas:

1. The provision of pedestrian footway / pavement improvements
2. Pedestrian linkage improvement including contributions to enhance the subway and its approaches. A figure of (£9,500) was required for these purposes.
3. The free use of the car park including the use of disabled spaces for the parking of private motor vehicles on a first come first served basis by users and staff of the Palace Theatre between the hours of 6pm and 12 midnight on every Saturday and Sunday

Numbers 1 and 2 had been completed in full and were discharged in May 2007 and therefore were not a consideration for Members. However, Number 3 was an ongoing agreement which was the subject of the application before Members.

Officers stated that the site had been up for purchase since Feb 2023 when Hughes ceased trading, and it was determined that the applicant may have more success if the carpark did not have a S106 agreement attached.

Officers were in support of the removal of the agreement as it was not reasonable to enforce one business to provide free parking to another.

At the invitation of the Chair, Mr. Scott Bracken, the applicant, addressed the Committee in support of the application.

After questions from Members the following was clarified by Officers:

• That there were a number of disabled parking sites in close proximity to the Palace Theatre which included two 24hour carparks.
• That it was unknown why it was deemed necessary 20 years ago to include the parking provision in the S106 agreement, however, it would not stand up to the current tests of necessity and reasonableness.

Members then debated the application

Although Members were sad to see the loss of parking provision, particularly for disabled users, they noted that removing the agreement was the right thing to do and if that permitted the site to come back under use it would be of a great benefit to the wider area.

It was further noted that the Palace Theatre was lucky to have attained the S106 agreement on the site in 2004, however, it was not suitable under regulations today.

Members also noted that the use of the carpark as a starting point for the Remembrance Day parade and asked that the site owner consider continuing to permit its use during that occasion.

On being put to the vote it was.

RESOLVED THAT

the request for the removal of the Section 106 agreement attached to 2004/066/FUL be granted.