Agenda item

Report of Head of Planning

(copy herewith)

Ward: East Hunsbury

Councillor Oldham left the meeting in accordance with his declaration of interest given earlier in the meeting.

The Head of Planning submitted a report in respect of application number N/2011/0323, elaborated thereon and referred to the Addendum that included additional representations from objectors and should have included a reference to a representation from County Councillor Gonzalez de Savage. He reminded the Committee of the extensive discussions to date, the proposals, and what changes had been made, since the application had been refused at the Committee meeting held on the 18^th October 2011. It was noted that the Committee’s previous concerns related to highways issues, especially traffic and pedestrian safety implications of the proposed change in vehicular access for Dot.com and the location and nature of an enlarged and traffic light controlled entrance to the Tesco Store from Clannell Road, both of which had been substantially revised by Tescos.

Councillor Larratt, as Ward Councillor, commented that he was pleased Tescos had made steps to improve the application. However, he confirmed that he was still concerned about litter and the landscape. He reported that the Highway Agency agreed that there was a need for a Section 106 agreement. He explained that his main concern was the revised access; especially the proximity to 28 Falconers Rise, which was already close to the highway. The problems would be further exacerbated by the installation of traffic lights and suggested that a roundabout or ‘dog-leg’ road be implemented and should the application be approved the Highway Authority be asked to consider this.

Mr Davidson, a resident of Falconers Rise, commented that he objected to the proposed installation of traffic lights and the location of the recycling facilities. Referring to other properties on Falconers Rise, he commented that the gardens of the properties acted as a buffer zone. However, his bungalow was directly opposite the proposed junction, which would be less than 2 metres from his bedroom window and the traffic lights within 1.5 metres. He commented that the location of the recycling centre was to allow for easy access of recycling vehicles to the M1 and he also expressed concern that the revised access would encourage rat running through the car park to / from the Mereway roundabout; the problem would only get worse and he requested that the exit be closed off completely.

Mr Costello reported that the position of Wootton and East Hunsbury Parish Council remained the same and they wanted the Committee to reject the application. He commented that the site had been described as a ‘major development’ and argued that as such, should not be developed further in a residential area. He noted that some of the amendments had gone some way to address the concerns of residents, but that they were not enough. He questioned the viability of the increase in floor space compared to the increase in actual retail space and asked the Committee to refuse the application.

Councillor Eldred, as Ward Councillor, commented that one of the main reasons for the application being refused last time was on the grounds of the anticipated increase in commercial vehicle movements in Sandhurst Close, this would still go ahead if the revised application was approved. He commented that there would be a large increase in traffic as it was suggested that there would be 137 extra deliveries per week and the close proximity to Danes Camp Leisure Centre posed an increase risk to children using these facilities.  He further commented that not everyone had been informed of the 21-day consultation and thus some residents had not had enough time to look at the revised plans. The influx of extra traffic, the dangers that this posed to children and the original refusal, which related to concerns regarding Sandhurst Close, were further reasons for the Committee to again refuse the application.

Mr Robeson, the Agent on behalf of Tesco’s, commented that should the junction on Clannell Road be moved further west, further advice would be needed from the Highway Authority. Referring to the proposed yellow box in Clannell Road, Mr Robeson commented that this remained a possibility and funding would be made available for monitoring the need for it. He further commented that having a roundabout, instead of traffic lights at the junction with Falconers Rise would increase the potential for the road being used as a ‘rat-run’ and therefore would be less safe for pedestrians and residents. He noted that another consequence of the installation of a round-about would be the loss of approximately 100 metres of landscaping on the site, which would, once re-landscaped, take up to 10 years to re-grow. He commented that the access on to Sandhurst Close would not have a measurable impact and he further explained that the amendments made to the proposed application had been considered following dialogue with the local community.

In response to questions asked by the Committee, Mr Robeson explained that discussions and consultations with local residents had been ongoing for two years. He also stated that by relocating the dot.com business, as now proposed the landscaping could be reinforced adjacent to Sandhurst Close. Mr Robeson stated that if the Committee felt it necessary, a further condition to the application could be included to allow signage to be erected at Sandhurst Close, which would clarify the restricted vehicular access restrict access.

Mrs Gosling on behalf of Tescos commented that the store was very busy and that the application was about increasing the service that it offered to its customers. She stated that it was a necessity to expand and they were committed to improving the local land and area and that Tescos had spent over 2 years consulting with the community. In response to concerns previously expressed about litter, she stated that the manager of Tescos had agreed to extend the area cleaned and inspected by Tescos even though this was not a planning requirement. She explained the Tescos were committed to investing over £1 million to the development and would sign legal agreements to this effect.

In response to questions, Mrs Gosling explained that the application was about providing a better service to customers due to overtrading and therefore there was a simply a question of expansion. In relation to the recycling vehicle access, she explained that there were two accesses that could adequately be used.

The Head of Planning referred to the photograph of Mr Davidson’s bungalow and whilst expression sympathy for him, explained that it was not unusual to have traffic lights so close to a house.  He commented that members might wish to consider conditions over and above those already recommended.

The Committee discussed the application.

RESOLVED:   That the application be approved for the reason set out below, subject to the conditions set out in the appendix to the report and any additional conditions considered necessary by the Head of Planning in liaison with the Chair of Planning Committee and, with an informative note regarding the applicant’s duties under the Wildlife and Countryside Act; subject to prior completion of planning obligations on terms acceptable to the Council’s Head of Planning and the Borough Solicitor within three calendar months of the resolution to so grant conditional planning permission. In brief, the relevant planning obligations should address:

a)           Notwithstanding the proposed internal floor uses indicated on submitted drawings; the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995 (as amended) and the Town and Country Planning (Use Classes) Order 1987 (as amended) or, any future enactments to similar effect, the net retail sales area within the proposed major store as proposed to be enlarged shall at no time exceed 7,894 sq metres. In addition, the net retail sales area used for the display and sale of all goods other than “convenience goods” shall at no time exceed 3,470 sq metres.

b)           Prior to the new element of the enlarged building being brought into use, an agreed payment for the enhancement of cycle routes which link the Tesco Mereway store to other destinations within 1.7 kilometres of the application site. And,

c)            Prior to the bringing into use of the new road access from Sandhurst Close being brought into use, an agreed payment to Northampton County Council to be used to enact and implement measures to prevent future on-street parking congestion on Sandhurst Close and, the installation of a suitably located pedestrian crossing. And,

d)           Prior to the new element of the enlarged building being brought into use, the Applicant shall make a payment to Northampton CC for the better provision of public bus services to and from the Development. Such services to be as considered appropriate by NCC. And,

e)           Prior to the new element of the enlarged building being brought into use, an agreed and scaled payment will be made towards local fire and rescue service infrastructure costs to reflect the net additional floor space proposed. And,

f)              With effect from the date of the relevant planning permission, Tesco shall use reasonable endeavours to establish and facilitate a landowners’ and operators (including bus operators) forum (“The Mereway Forum”). That Forum will drive forward initiatives to better use existing and improved facilities.  Membership of the Forum should be limited to owners and operators within Mereway as defined above. The public and other relevant parties may, as appropriate, be invited to its meetings.  The Forum will liaise with and consult with statutory and other stakeholders (for example the Borough Council, the County Council, the West Northamptonshire Development Corporation and Parish Councils on matters that involve their roles and functions as those relate to Mereway Forum).  The Forum would expect to be consulted by those bodies on initiatives being brought forward that directly or indirectly affect the operation of the Mereway Forum and its constituent operators.  Tesco will fund and facilitate meetings for a period of no less than five years; providing meeting accommodation and a secretariat, using all reasonable endeavours to ensure that the future Mereway Forum meet not less than three times a year. And,

g)           Prior to occupation of the enlarged development as hereby permitted, Tesco shall prepare and submit to Northampton Borough Council, the Wootton and East Hunsbury Parish Council and the future Mereway Forum, a written Method Statement describing management measures, waste bins and other measures which shall be implemented to routinely and frequently cleanse and remove litter and detritus from the exterior of the application site and its wider environs (including the car park, peripheral landscaped areas and nearby pedestrian routes). And,

h)            From the commencement of new development Tesco shall fund, manage and proactively implement measures described in the “Green Travel Plan” submitted with the planning application. And,

i)              Tesco will facilitate the use and availability of their car park for visitors to other uses within the Mereway Centre for a period of up to three hours without charge and, prominent signage shall be erected throughout that car park and fronting Sandhurst Close to make this off-street parking facility apparent to the public, including those attending the Dane’s Camp Leisure Centre and the Simon de Senlis Primary School. And

j)              Prior to the new element of the enlarged building being brought into use, an agreed payment for improved pedestrian crossing facilities north of the Mereway underpass – subject to design criteria in compliance with DfT Local Note 1.95.

For the reason that:

The site is within an existing centre identified in Northampton Local Plan and therefore a sequential assessment under PPS4 is not required.  The proposal would have a negative impact on Northampton town centre; however this would not be significant and would be outweighed by the benefit of introducing control over the level of comparison floorspace in the enlarged store.  Given the location, scale and nature of the development, combined with mitigation secured via legal agreement and conditions, the proposed development would not adversely affect highway safety, the free flow of traffic or residential amenity, would promote the use of alternative modes of transport and improve energy efficiency / carbon emissions of the store.  The proposal therefore accords with Policies 1, 2, 3, MKSM SRS Northamptonshire 2 and MKSM SRS Northamptonshire 3 of the East Midlands Regional Plan and Policies E20, E19, E40 and T12 of the Northampton Local Plan and the aims and objectives of national planning policy, notably PPS1, PPS4, PPG13 and PPS24.

OR, if planning permission is not granted in the above terms within three calendar months, REFUSE PLANNING PERMISSION on the grounds that the applicant has not secured adequate mitigation through the Sec 106 for appropriate reasons, the framing of which is hereby delegated to the Council’s Head of Planning.

Councillor Oldham rejoined the meeting.