Agenda item

Report of Head of Planning (copy herewith)

Ward: New Duston

Councillor Golby moved to the public seating in accordance with his declaration of predetermination set out at minute 4 above.

The Head of Planning submitted a report in respect of application no. N/2013/0131, elaborated thereon and referred to the Addendum that set out further representations received plus the officer’s responses, and noted that a revised plan had been submitted which had led to a revised wording of proposed condition 2.

Councillor Caswell, as the Ward Councillor, stated that the area did not need another shop as there were already seven in the vicinity.  This would be a huge shop and the existing shops would be put out of business.  There is a good bus service to take residents to the big supermarkets in town.  Another shop is not needed in the area and the Duston Parish Council had other ideas they would like to be considered on the site.

Mr Gary Boddington, speaking on behalf of another local resident, stated that two properties facing the site (256 and 258 Main Road) were not mentioned in the report.  As there was only one vehicular entrance to the site the lights of vehicles exiting the site at night would shine into the living room of 256 Main Road and would be intrusive and a violation.  The current service station closed at 6pm.  Delivery vehicles would need to use the car park to access the proposed shop.  Vehicle parking would encroach on the grass verges.  The bus stop was to remain outside the site and would make the area busy.  No mention was made of access for emergency vehicles along the road and to the site.  The shop would be able to sell what it liked and was unnecessary as there were already two shops in close proximity.  The nearest existing convenience store was three shops away.

Mrs Marlene Williamson stated that she lived opposite the proposed shop.  She stated that she and other residents would suffer from increased traffic to the shop, which was already horrendous now and frightening crossing the road.  If she did not leave home before 8am she could not get the car off her property and she was unable to drive on to her property between 2.30pm and 4pm.  The proposed shop was unnecessary as there was a convenience store nearby and five other local shops.  Other shops were also convenient via car or bus.  There were problems with young people gathering around the telephone box at the site which was intimidating and there were instances of anti-social behaviour.

Parish Councillor Alan Earle, Chairman of Duston Parish Council, referred to the traffic problems in the area and the need to support local shops to keep Duston vibrant and viable.  He referred to a petition against the application, which had been kept in a local shop and signed by over 800 people, plus over 168 letters of objection.  He referred to anti-social behaviour in the alley next to the site.  The Parish Council wished to see affordable housing on the site to protect the viability of Duston.

Councillor Golby stated that he believed a shop would not be efficient use of the site and referred to two convenience stores close by.  He stated that there was a need to support local businesses as part of the community.  He also referred to the traffic issues around the site and anti-social behaviour where people gathered in the alleyway and by the bus stop.  Nearly 1,000 people had objected to the application.  He supported Duston Parish Council’s wish to see affordable housing on the site.

(Councillor Golby left the meeting in accordance with his earlier stated declaration of predetermination.)

The Head of Planning stated that many of the issues referred to by the speakers, including anti social behaviour and traffic issues were already in existence and that the application was likely to improve the situation by introducing CCTV cameras and a new car parking layout at the site.  The Highway Authority had offered no objections to the proposal.  The site was located in a local centre and the proximity of other shops and convenience stores was not a material planning consideration.  Existing shops were able to open beyond 6pm, which was the closing time of the current filling station.  The Committee had to consider the application submitted and could not consider potential alternative uses for the site such as affordable housing, for which no application had been made.  The application was for a convenience store of 279.2m², which fell well within the figures of 2,500m² in the NPPF and 1,000m² in submitted Joint Core Strategy.  Each local centre had parity and the impact of the proposed store could not be considered on the other local centre in Duston village.  It was important to ensure that each application was judged on its merits.

The Committee discussed the application.

The Committee considered that legal advice was required on the issues under discussion.  It was agreed that that there should be a short adjournment and the Committee would then reconvene in private session to receive that advice.

The Chair moved that the public and press be excluded from the meeting on the grounds that there would be disclosure to them of exempt information as defined by section 100(1) of the local Government Act 1972 by reference to paragraph 3 of Schedule 12(A) to such Act.  The motion was carried at 7.17pm.

The Committee took legal and procedural advice from the Head of Planning and the Borough Secretary and Monitoring Officer.

The Committee then resumed in public session at 7.32pm.

Councillor Meredith proposed and Councillor Oldham seconded, “That the proposed development would have a detrimental impact on visual and neighbour amenity contrary to Policy E20 of the Northampton Local Plan.”

RESOLVED:         That the proposed development would have a detrimental impact on visual and neighbour amenity contrary to Policy E20 of the Northampton Local Plan

(Councillor Golby re-joined the meeting.)