Agenda item

Demolition of existing building and erection of retail food store, (Use Class E(a)), with associated access, parking and amenities.

Recommendation: That subject to the completion of a Section 106 Agreement in respect of a monitoring and evaluation fee of £6k covering a 5 year period relating to the travel plan and a contribution of £16.8k towards highway/cycleway/sustainable transport improvements, that permission be delegated to the Head of Regulatory Services to GRANT PLANNING PERMISSION subject to conditions.

The application was for the demolition of an existing building and the erection of retail food store (Use Class E(a)), with associated access, parking and amenities.

The Officer provided an update. Members who sat on the November Planning Committee were aware that this application was deferred. For those that were not in attendance, a summary of the reasons for deferral and actions which have occurred since:

-            Firstly, the applicant confirmed they did not wish to change the access arrangements and wanted to pursue with the existing design and location of the access citing that alternative locations would not be feasible.

-            Officers then instructed Evoke to independently review the highway arrangements. They concluded there was insufficient grounds to ‘refuse’ the junction design proposals from a highway perspective.  A number of improvements were recommended, and these had been implemented and were shown on the updated highway drawing.

-            In response to erecting fencing or similar means to stop parking on the grass verge either side of the entrance, the Highway Authority confirmed that higher kerb should be perfectly feasible to deter parking and can form part of the s278 agreement.

-            On cycle safety, the Highway Authority was content that the scheme enhanced cycle access in the vicinity of the proposed foodstore – mitigation of the crossing point allowed for suitable access to the eastern side of Watford Road and a connection into Gypsy Lane.

-            Delivery times had been confirmed to align with the opening hours of the store and the relevant condition had been amended to reflect this.

-            Site visit arranged and took place, without agent, and discussion was had regarding whether the Toucan crossing required as part of the Warner. Bros. scheme could be provided. The applicant confirmed they do not need to provide the toucan based on the development proposed.

-            In respect of the right hand turn and potential conflict with those turning right into the site, the modelling, speed data (outside of school holidays), audits and review have all concluded that it would be acceptable. In addition, it should be noted that:

-        Priority is given to those turning right into the site 

-        The modelling data is based on worse case scenarios confirms the traffic volumes and speed and that there is sufficient space / gaps in the flow to accommodate these movements. The data had also used growthed data up to 2036 and confirmed there was still capacity within the highway network

-        Better visibility of the access from those approaching from the roundabout was considered to alter behaviour of drivers and influence speed

-        It should be noted that it would be hard to completely rule out any conflict between vehicles given driver behaviour, but the scheme has been designed and been found to meet all requirements and thus fully accords with the NPPF in so far as it has been demonstrated that the scheme would not have an unacceptable impact on highways safety.

It was agreed that a site visit was still required with Officers and Councillors, and this would be scheduled during late afternoon, early evening, with the Applicant’s Transport Consultant present at the site.

A recommendation to defer the decision to enable the Members of the Planning Committee to have a site visit to be made with the Applicants’ Highways Consultant present at the site was proposed by Councillor Sara Bedford, seconded by Councillor Steve Drury, put to the vote with 7 Members For, 1 Against and 1 Abstained.

RESOLVED: that consideration of planning application 22/1764/FUL be deferred to enable a site visit to be made with the Applicant’s Highways Consultant present at the site.