The Committee received a report on the above application.

An update report was tabled at the meeting following the receipt of revised drawings, documents and rebuttals submitted by the applicant on 28 April 2026. A list of the newly submitted plans and supporting documents was included within the update report, and the update report set out additional information on Section 106 obligations.

A verbal update was provided at the meeting advising the Committee that, as set out in the update report, the applicant had submitted revised plans and supporting documents the day prior to the meeting. Officers reported that the amendments to the application were minor and included the removal of the proposed servicing bay on Napier Road, the removal of tree planters from the Mass Rapid Transit reserved strip (to be replaced with a grass verge) and the provision of additional cycle parking. 

Officers reported that there had been limited time to fully review the additional submitted information. However, having assessed the documentation over the preceding 24 hours, it was officers’ opinion that the revisions did not adequately address or overcome the reasons for refusal, with the exception of reason 5 that related to cycle parking provision. Officers confirmed that the updated information demonstrated that adequate cycle parking could be accommodated within the development and therefore recommended that reason for refusal number 5 be withdrawn.   

The Committee was further advised that, as set out in the update report, the applicant had indicated agreement in principle to the provide certain infrastructure contributions and mitigation works. However, these had not been secured through a completed Section 106 agreement and, in the absence of such an agreement, officers recommended the other reasons for refusal remained.

Officers also requested that, as set out in the original report, should the Committee resolve to refuse planning permission, authority be delegated to the Assistant Director of Planning, Transport and Public Protection Services to amend, remove, or add to the reasons for refusal as deemed necessary following the further detailed review of the newly-submitted documentation.

Comments and objections were received and considered.

Resolved –

(1)           That application PL/24/0846/FUL be refused planning permission for the reasons set out in the original report with the informatives as recommended, subject to the deletion of reason for refusal 5 (cycle parking provision);

(2)           That the Assistant Director of Planning, Transport and Public Protection Services be authorised to amend, remove or add to the reasons for refusal following the consideration of any revised plans or documents submitted by the applicant.