Agenda item

Consideration was given to planning application 24/0430/REM Land West Of Maynard Grove, Wynyard Village, Wynyard.

 

This planning application was considered at planning committee on the 6th November 2024 where the planning committee deferred the determination of the application to give the applicant the opportunity to seek to address the concerns raised by members and the objectors. These concerns were noted as;

 

•Consider further consultation with the community;

 

•Reconsider in terms of the layout, design and servicing arrangements.

 

Since the last committee the applicant had submitted revised plans to show a service bay on the verge outside of the local centre, provided updated servicing plan and revised plans to show an uplift of the floorspace of the community hall. The revised details were subject to public consultation. Whilst no direct public consultation was undertaken by the applicant following the last meeting, a statement from the applicant giving their perspective on the background and ethos behind the local centre had been submitted. This included an explanation over the aims for the local centre, current position on potential end users and clarity over community engagement which had taken place previously.

 

Following the Local Planning Authority’s consultation on the submitted revised details two further letters of objection had been received as well as two letters of support. No objection had been received from any of the technical consultees.

 

Whilst Officers were satisfied that the condition imposed on the parent permission (ref; 20/2408/OUT) gave sufficient control to secure an appropriate mix of end users to serve the local community. Condition 6 was also now recommended which looked to restrict the number of cafes/restaurants within the centre. The main purpose of this would be to ensure that the parking provision was sufficient for the centre as a whole and to ensure a blend of end users.

 

Following consideration of the revised submission, the recommendation to members was that the proposed development remained an acceptable form of development which would be complying of the parent permission, the Wynyard Masterplan and policies of the local plan when read as a whole. The recommendation was therefore one of approval subject to conditions a set out below.

 

The consultees that had been notified and the comments that had been received were detailed within the main report.

 

Neighbours were notified and the comments received were detailed within the main report.

 

The planning policies and material planning considerations that were relevant to the consideration of the application were contained within the main report.

 

The Planning Officers report concluded that it was considered that where practicable the developer had sorted to address concerns raised.

 

Given the considerations detailed within the report the proposed development was considered to be visually acceptable, and it was not considered that the proposed development would have any adverse impacts on levels of residential amenity or highway safety to justify a refusal of the application. The proposed scheme was therefore in accordance with the relevant local and national planning policies and  recommended for approval subject to those conditions outlined within the report above.

 

Since the original report, a further 3 letters of objection had been received which suggested that there had been a lack of consultation between the developer and local community

 

Officers explained that the Planning Authority could not force the applicant to carry out any consultation with the local community. The recommendation remained as detailed within the original report.

 

Officers also informed the Committee that since the original report there had been an uplift in the floorplan of the community centre.

 

Objectors attended the meeting and were given the opportunity to make representation. Their comments could be summarised as follows:

 

- The proposed changes to deliveries and refuse collection were not supported by Wynyard Residents Association and it was also not supported by the Councils Highways, Transport and Environment department .

 

-  Wynyard Residents Association had worked hard to keep residents informed of the proposed development and ascertain opinions. Cameron Hall however had made no attempt to consult with residents regarding the proposed plans despite a strong recommendation from Members of the Planning Committee.

 

A TPS Transport Consultant attended the meeting and was given the opportunity to make representation. Their comments could be summarised as follows:

 

- The Applicant had tried to take residents comments on board.

 

- The community centre floorplan had increased in size.

 

- A designated loading bay had been introduced to allow for deliveries.

 

- There was an amended service management plan submitted

 

- Refuse would be collected once a week.

 

- There was no legal requirement for the applicant to consult further with residents.

 

- All comments received from the Councils consultation had been considered.

 

- There was the possibility of a private medical facility which would also provide some NHS services; however, end users of the units could not be guaranteed.

 

- A financial contribution had been made to a local GP Practice.

 

- There was a unit available which was suitable for a convenience store should a suitable business come forward.

 

- There were conditions limiting certain uses. Should someone come forward with applications outside of those conditions then they would have to be considered by the Planning Committee.

 

- It was felt there would be no issues in terms of safety to the public when deliveries were being made as these would be small deliveries as and when needed and it was expected that the units would be mostly occupied by small businesses.

 

- The proposed development was typical of local centres of this size. The applicant had listened to residents, hence the proposed loading bay.

 

The Applicants Agent attended the meeting and were given the opportunity to make representation. Their comments could be summarised as follows:

 

- There was a dedicated service layby now proposed and to prevent public parking, parking restrictions could be introduced, however Highways Officers did not support the new proposal and felt the original plan was more acceptable

 

- Refuse would be collected from the car park, off peak. once a week.

 

- The volume of carparking was acceptable.

 

A supporter attended the meeting and was given the opportunity to make representation. Their comments could be summarised as follows:

 

- The supporter informed the Committee that they had been planning for over a year to occupy one of the units as an independent veterinary practice.

 

- A veterinary practice was a long-term orientated business and would create employment and a much-needed facility.

 

- There were approximately over 5000 pets in the local area and a veterinary practice would support responsible ownership, also offering pet foods and cremation services.

 

- Members were asked to not delay the proposed development any further.

 

Members were given the opportunity to ask questions / make comments. These could be summarised as follows:

 

- Due to the expectation that most businesses occupying the units would be small it was queried whether the size of the delivery vehicles could be conditioned for example to the size of a transit van?

 

- Clarity was sought as to what would happen if Members were minded to refuse the application.

 

- The proposal of the layby was a surprise as this was not suggested at the previous planning committee meeting when the application was deferred. Refuse collection was more of a concern in terms of public safety, however nothing had changed in this regard within the new proposal.

 

- The newly proposed layby was pointless and more detrimental to residents.

 

- The supporter representing the possible veterinary practice had indicated that there would be 10 employees, therefore it was questioned whether there would be adequate car parking if employees were taking up 10 spaces

 

- Members were disappointed that further consultation had not taken place between the applicant and residents following the requests made at the last Planning Committee meeting.

 

- One of the proposed units had an external terraced area which was not necessarily required and could be better utilised as additional car parking. This could add additional spaces should a rear service road be included helping to mitigate the squeeze on the local centre. It was also asked whether the space between the red outline and highway verge could be used for car parking and help facilitate a service road.

 

Officers were given the opportunity to respond to comments/issues raised. Their responses could be summarised as follows:

 

- Where Members had asked for a condition to be included to restrict the size of delivery vehicles officers confirmed that proposed condition 2 stated that should the development be approved, it should be carried out in full accordance with the Service Management Plan received by the local planning Authority 14 November 2024, however this relied on the inclusion of the layby. Should Members wish to revert to the original plan then the wording would need to be amended accordingly

 

- In terms  of the possibility of the application being refused, the applicant could appeal, and if refused by the planning inspectorate, then there was the potential that the applicant could submit a revised scheme which could be smaller than the current proposal.

 

- The Highways, Transport and Design Principal Engineer explained to the Committee that the layby was not supported as service vehicles in the layby would only be able to turn around in the car park, therefore from a practical common-sense point of view this would most likely result in delivery vehicles delivering from the car park. If there was a loop road around the back of the proposal, then the layby would work, however for this to be viable the local centre would have to be squeezed in, and car parking would be lost. There would be no highways issues should the layby not go ahead.

 

- In terms of the possibility of a convenience store occupying one of the units, deliveries would most likely be made by a Transit or Luton van, it would not need a Heavy Goods Vehicle to make deliveries, therefore smaller service vehicles meant there was no real need for the layby.

 

- Should members be minded to approve the proposal but had concerns about the layby, they could revert back to the original plan, however conditions would have to be revised by the Head of the Planning Service.

 

- Officers considered the collection of refuse from the front of the units acceptable.

 

- The calculation of car parking spaces on the proposed development was not associated with car ownership in Wynyard. The proposed site was a sustainable area with footpath and cycle links. The methodology using TRICS was the observation of the actual developments in the area and the number of trips to the proposed site which gave car parking accumulation, therefore the Highways, Transport and Design Principal Engineer could not argue the number of car parking spaces were not adequate. Due to the end users of the units not being known at this stage exact number of spaces needed could not be determined however the TRICS data was a robust starting point.

 

- Officers confirmed that the applicant had engaged with residents  prior to the original application and went above and beyond what was required. Officers were therefore satisfied that the applicant had carried out satisfactory consultation with residents. The Council carried out statutory consultation in terms of site and press notices as well as letters.

 

- Members were informed that a service road could be put around the back of the local centre, however it would impact on residential amenity as it would be too close to dwellings. In terms of the layby servicing would have to be in the layby, turn around and exit through the same place it entered or via the residential cul-de-sac. The verge between the and footway and cycle way shown in red on the plans was partly open space. The houses had all been designed to be stepped back, squeezing carparking to the front would have a visual impact.

 

A vote took place and the application was approved.

 

 

RESOLVED that planning application 24/0430/REM be approved subject to the following conditions and informatives below;

 

Time Limit

01 The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of three years from the date of this permission.

 

Approved Plans

02 The development hereby approved shall be in accordance with the following approved plans;

 

Plan Reference Number                                         Date Received

PL-LC-04_REVC                                                     17 September 2024

2044-04C                                                                  17 September 2024

4982-XX-XX-DR-E-200                                          17 September 2024

PL-LC-03_REVD                                                     14 November 2024

PL-LC-05_REVC                                                     14 November 2024

PL-LC-06_REVC                                                     14 November 2024

PL-LC-07_REVC                                                     17 September 2024

PL-LC-08_REVD                                                     14 November 2024

PL-LC-09_REVC                                                     14 November 2024

PL-LC-10_REVC                                                     17 September 2024

QD1898-03-03-D                                                     17 September 2024

PL-LC-02                                                                   17 September 2024

PL-LC-GM-01_REVB                                              14 November 2024

 

Service Management Plan

03 The development hereby approved shall be carried out in full accordance with the Service Management Plan, received by the Local Planning Authority on the 14 November 2024

 

Bin/ Refuse

04 Notwithstanding the submitted details, prior to the occupation of the development hereby approved a refuse collection plan shall be submitted to and agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Thereafter the hereby approved commercial/community units shall operate in complete conformity with the approved details.

 

External Materials

05 Notwithstanding the submitted details in the application, the external walls and roofs shall not be commenced until precise details of the materials to be used in their construction have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Thereafter the development shall be implemented in accordance with the approved details.

 

Hard landscaping and street furniture

06 No above ground construction shall take place until full details of proposed hard landscaping including street furniture have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. This shall include all external finishing materials, finished levels, and all construction details confirming materials, colours, finishes and fixings. The scheme shall be completed to the satisfaction of the Local Planning Authority and in accordance with the approved details within a period of 12 months from the date on which the development commenced or prior to the occupation of any part of the development. Any defects in materials or workmanship appearing within a period of 12 months from completion of the total development shall be made-good by the owner as soon as practicably possible

 

Restaurant/ Café

07 Notwithstanding condition 06 of application ref 20/2408/OUT, the units hereby approved shall not be occupied by more than one restaurant/ café, unless it can be demonstrated to the satisfaction of the Local Planning Authority that his would not have an impact on parking provision or highway safety.

 

Loading Bay

08 The development hereby approved shall not commence until the loading bay as shown on plan ref PL-LC-03_REVD received by the Local Planning Authority on the 14 November 2024 is provided. Thereafter the loading bay shall remain free at all times, except for the purposes of loading/unloading in association with the use of occupiers of the units of the local centre.

 

INFORMATIVE OF REASON FOR PLANNING APPROVAL

Informative: Working Practices

The Local Planning Authority has worked in a positive and proactive manner and sought solutions to problems arising in dealing with the planning application by seeking a revised scheme to overcome issues and by the identification and imposition of appropriate planning conditions.