Motorcycle showroom at 1 Howard Drive, Borehamwood

“DEVELOPMENT Change of use from construction shop Class E (Commercial, Business and Service) to motorcycle showroom with associated servicing (Sui Generis use), including retrospective alterations to the shopfront (amended description).”

“THE PROPOSAL Change of use from construction shop Class E (Commercial, Business and Service) to motorcycle showroom with associated servicing (Sui Generis use) (emended description).”

“APPLICATION SITE AND SURROUNDINGS The application site comprises a ground-floor commercial unit positioned at the end of a terraced row, on a corner site which is on the northern side of Howard Drive, and on the eastern side of Balmoral Drive. The terrace is characterised by commercial uses at ground-floor level with residential accommodation above. To the rear, a shared car park provides off-street parking, while on-street parking is available to the front.”

“The wider surrounding area is predominantly residential in character, made up largely of terraced housing with a limited number of commercial premises present.”

“Reference number Description Date and outcome TP/53/0297 SHOP FRONT 25 March 1953 Approval TP/93/0295 Change of use from A1 (shop) to A3 (food and drink) 16 June 1993 Grant Permission…”

“Responses: Asset Management Comments received state that the unit is part of a council- owned retail parade beneath a three-storey residential block. The main concern is that the proposed cycle rack would be located on a communal walkway outside the applicant's leased area and could obstruct the emergency fire exit route.”

“Officer’s response: The concerns raised have been addressed through amended plans, which now relocate the cycle racks to the rear of the building within the shared car parking area, resolving the concerns raised. Environmental Health No objection to the proposed development, subject to a…”

“To mitigate concerns about motorcycle noise, parking pressures and general disturbance, the applicant had confirmed that all motorcycles would be delivered through the rear entrance via Balmoral Drive. The Highways Authority had reviewed the proposal and had raised no objections. Parking on the footway was an offence and this would be added to the informative.”

“A Member raised a concern about the pedestrian foot-way and requested a condition be included that there was good signage at the front advising not to park on the pavement. The officer affirmed that a ‘parking management plan’ condition could be imposed. As part of the condition, the applicant would be required to supply details of signage, and a training regime for employees to ensure that obstructive parking did not result from the proposal.”

“It was proposed by Councillor C Gray and seconded by Councillor N Susman that the recommendations as set out in the report be agreed. .”

“-PL 33- For: (13 total) – Councillors M Allen, M Amron, G Briski, D Lambert, A Kaza, C Gray, H Green, C Shenton, C Myers, N Susman, P Richards and S Quilty. Against: (0 total) – None. Abstain: (0 total) – None. Total votes cast: 13”

“RESOLVED that planning permission be GRANTED subject to the signage condition as part of the parking management plan. 321.3”