Commercial unit change of use at Moorland Stores & Post Office School Road, Kirkby-in-Furness

“SUMMARY 1.1 The application site consists of a small single-storey commercial unit falling within Use Class F2 (community use). The unit was previously occupied as a village store. Planning permission has previously been refused for the partial conversion of the commercial unit to form part of an adjacent residential dwelling on the basis that the previous application had failed to demonstrate that the community use of the commercial unit was unviable.”

“The application has been supported by evidence of over a year of marketing of the property for let without any meaningful offers. The applicant has demonstrated that the existing unit is not viable due to the use class it currently falls within and the proposed use is considered appropriate for the location. Therefore, the application has demonstrated that the proposed change of use is acceptable. RECOMMENDATION 2.1 The application is recommended for approval.”

“The level of marketing is considered proportionate and the proposed letting cost is considered reasonable as it is the same or less than similar properties advertised for let within the wider area. The applicant has stated that the unit “has been actively marketed for lease for a continuous period of over 12 months, without securing any interest or viable offers”.”

“CONCLUSION 9.1 The application has demonstrated that the existing community use is unviable and officers accept that, due to the size limitations of the unit, alternative community uses are not viable. Additionally, the proposed use is considered acceptable as it would not give rise to significant impacts on residential amenity. Therefore, it is recommended that planning permission be approved.”

“REPRESENTATIONS 6.1 6 objections were received. The reasons for objection are as follows: - The lack of food shops within the wider locality; - The poor bus services within the area, and the infrequency of train services; - The size of the unit, the level of marketing, the lack of internal shop furniture; - The limited parking within the vicinity; - The original intention for the shop to be retained; and - The lack of internal wall shown on the submitted floor plans.”

“Members’ attention was drawn to a site plan, indicating the red line boundary of the site and photographs of the site and surrounding area. It was noted that the applicant had marketed the property for a period with no substantive offers which highlighted the lack of viability for the unit.”

“The Senior Planning Officer responded to questions from members. He noted that the size of the property would limit the type of business that could occupy the unit and that there may be further applications regarding this site due to its limitations. Following further questions, he explained that permitted development rights to convert the unit to a residential unit would not immediately apply but may apply in the future.”

“Members noted that there was no real community benefit to the property, noting the applicant’s viability tests. They felt that that the application as it stood was acceptable. A motion to approve the application was moved and seconded.”

“RESOLVED, that planning permission be granted, subject to the following conditions:-”

“Condition (1) The development permitted shall be begun before the expiration of three years from the date of this permission.”