Agenda item

Approved subject to conditions.

The Committee considered the full application for the erection of a single deck car park with under croft and surface level car park together with vehicular access to the site from Lauda Drive and St James Road. The removal of existing car parking and its replacement with landscaping including a covered walkway, refurbished bridge, new pedestrian and cycle bridge, gatehouses, kiosks, cycle hub and solar panels together with the demolition of two dwellings associated development. Outline application (with all matters reserved except access) for the erection of a marketing building, health and well-being hub, extension to unit 5, extension to unit 1, pedestrian bridge together with associated development.

The Principal Planning Officer, Andrew Longbottom, outlined the information in the report and Committee Updates and provided a presentation which included maps, plans, site layout and photographs from various viewpoints to provide contextual information.

Simon Wheeler addressed the Committee in objection to the application.  Objections and concerns included:

·       Lack of consultation with local businesses affected by the proposed development

·       Increased traffic movement through the cul-de-sac and associated risks of congestion in St. James’ Road

·       The proposed traffic management plans in St. James’ Road and the impact on business delivers, staff and customers

·       Impact on staff egress and ingress

·       Road safety risks associated with the influx of additional vehicles and large vehicles in the turning head on St. James’s Road

·       Contra to National policy

·       No mechanism to secure, local economic benefits

·       Would not provide local employment.

Nick Pinney addressed the Committee in objection to the application.  Objections and concerns included:

·       Opening hours and proposed peak traffic flow to and from the Mercedes site would conflict and impact both staff and peak customer access to their business

·       Potential restriction of future growth on the Travis Perkins site

·       The restriction of parking for customers

·       The impacts on the highway network

·       Road safety

·       Impact on the trade of local businesses.

Ian Smith, the Applicant, addressed the Committee in support of the application and provided an overview of the reasons for, and the benefits of, the proposed development.  And provided information regarding:

·       A commitment to be Net Zero by 2030, inclusion of PV panels and EV charging points

·       Provision of an improved environment for the increased work force

·       Reduction on the reliance on car usage

·       The landscaping scheme would provide a biodiversity net gain of 10%

·       Significant investment would attract sponsors

·       Highway mitigation measures had been agreed with the Highway Authority

The Development Management Manager clarified that the impact of additional traffic on a typical day on St. James’ Road had been assessed.  The traffic management plan would include mitigation measures to address concerns in the event of a worst-case scenario occurring.

During the course of the discussion and debate the Committee considered:

·       The extent of the Traffic Impact Assessment and the consideration given to the impact on the surrounding highways network. Scrutinised the background evidence that supported the transport assessment and the outcome of the findings

·       The emergency services requirement for free movement to the site and mitigation measures to ensure access

·       The number and peak timings of vehicle movements to Travis Perkins, included HGV deliveries, tradesmen and staff and tradesmen and staff

·       The local businesses expectation of engagement regarding the application

·       Traffic ingress and egress through the gatehouse on St. James’ Road and concerns regarding potential delays and considered the options around utilising Lauder Road

·       Considered the site security measures, at both entrances, during peak traffic hours and mitigation of risk of congestion on local roads

·       Traffic mitigation measures proposed and the degree of impact on local businesses,

·       Commitment to Net Zero by 2030 and the measures that would be implemented

·       Maintenance of air quality on site, reduction of vehicle movements by 10%, and the proposal to move to electric cars powered by the PV panels on site and trucks using biofuels

·       The Active Travel Plan and the extension of the cycleways and improved crossing points, access to footpaths and the public transport links

·       Clarification that Large Goods Vehicles (LGV’s) would access the site via Lauder Road

·       Condition 50 and the Car Parking Management Plan enable an ongoing review of mitigation measures in place.

The Assistant Director of Planning and Development outlined the officer’s alternative recommendation:

The Assistant Director of Planning and Development be given delegated powers to grant permission for the development subject to conditions as set out in the report, and delegated authority to delete or vary those conditions. And subject to the completion of a legal agreement relating to the additional parking restrictions on St. James Road and the payment of £5,000 towards the travel plan monitoring, The conditions as set out in full in the report, with two additional informatives, the first relates to the consultation expectations of the authority  in terms of condition  13 and the second, the requirement for the applicants to provide a contact telephone number for the premises that are also accessed from St James Road.

The additional informatives would be agreed in consultation with the Chair of Strategic Planning Committee, in advance of the issue of a decision notice.

Councillor Stone proposed the application be approved, subject to the inclusion of the additional informatives. The proposition was seconded by Councillor James and on being put to the meeting was declared carried unanimously.

In reaching its decision, the Committee considered the officer’s report, presentation, public representations and the Committee updates.

Resolved: That the Assistant Director for Planning and Development be given delegated authority to grant permission for the development, subject to conditions as set out in the report, and to delete or vary those conditions as deemed necessary. And subject to the completion of a legal agreement.