Agenda item

Demolition of Existing Buildings and Construction of Discount Foodstore (Class A1), Non Food Retail Unit (Class A1) with External Garden Centre, Provision of Associated Access, Customer Car Parking, Landscaping and Associated Works.

The Senior Planning Officer, Graham Blakey gave a detailed presentation on the report relating to the abovementioned planning application, a copy of which had been circulated (for copy see file of minutes).  Members noted that the written report was supplemented by a visual presentation which included photographs of the site.  The Senior Planning Officer advised that Members of the Committee had visited the site and were familiar with the location and setting.  The application was for demolition of existing buildings and construction of discount foodstore (Class A1), non food retail unit (Class A1) with external garden centre, provision of associated access, customer car parking, landscaping and associated works, subject to conditions and completion of a Section 106 Legal Agreement.

The Senior Planning Officer noted the position of the proposed Lidl and The Range stores on site plans, highlighting pedestrian links to the nearby bus stops.  Members noted a number of photographs showing the site from various approaches. 

The Committee learned there had been late representation in terms of the link road from Sherburn Road north to the site, with residents being concerned as regards the level of traffic.

The Senior Planning Officer noted in terms of representations, limited objections had been received from internal and statutory consultees and they had been satisfied, subject to conditions.  He added that the Highways Section had noted that the routes in the area were saturated and they had suggested a relief road and access to the site from Damson Way, a single access.  In relation to drainage, the Drainage Officer had noted a required run off rate of 9 litres per second, with the proposed development only achieving a rate of 51.9 litres per second.  It was added that accordingly there would be opportunity to incorporate prevention, source control and site control measures in accordance with the Council’s SuDs Adoption Guide 2016.

Members were informed of late representations from Indigo Planning on behalf of the owners of the Mono Containers site, objections in respect of highway safety and access proposals.  It was added that there had been 2 letters of support from residents; however, they had highlighted the potential impact of traffic and as regards future plans.  The Senior Planning Officer noted that the Applicant had made modifications to the application following comments received, in an attempt to address some of the issues raised, including those from Indigo Planning with a single point of access from Damson Way.

The Senior Planning Officer noted that City of Durham Local Plan Policy S8, relating to retail warehousing outlets, was judged to be out-of-date due to the evidence base and accordingly NPPF Paragraph 14 would be used in terms of a balance test looking at the impact of the development against the benefits of delivering the development. 

It was noted that in considering all the objections and issues raised, the Officer recommendation was for approval subject to conditions and completion of a Section 106 Legal Agreement.

The Chairman thanked the Officer for his presentation and asked Mr S Neale, from Indigo Planning to speak in objection to the application.

Mr S Neale explained he was a Director at Indigo Planning and represented Standard Life, owners of the former Mono Containers site.  He added he was accompanied by Mr David Hunter-Yeats, from WSP Highways Consultants.  He noted that in relation to the permission at the Mono site, £1.3million of highways works had been secured by a Section 278 Agreement.  He added that his client did not object to the development as such, rather the proposed access arrangement.  Members were asked to recall the proposal form a Public Inquiry in 2003 in terms of a filter lane for traffic turning left in to Damson Way from the north and Mr S Neale added that the development could generate 70% more trips and lead to 57 vehicle queues along Dragon Lane.  He noted the recommendation for a financial contribution in terms of highways, a relief road; however, Mr S Neale noted the potential of vehicles using the car parks as a “rat run” at busy times.  He added that it was felt the financial contribution was not suitable in this case and asked that conditions were added in terms of the highways elements as proposed by Indigo Planning.

The Chairman thanked Mr S Neale and asked Mr D Harris, a local resident, to speak in objection to the application.

Mr D Harris thanked the Chairman and Committee for the opportunity to speak and explained he lived in West Sherburn.  Mr D Harris noted he supported the development at the site, however, he could not accept the impact that would come from traffic associated with the development as it would affect his daily life.  He explained that he felt he had not received correct information from Planning in terms of the proposed relief road and asked that this be removed from the agenda.  Mr D Harris added that the Highways Development Manager, Mr J McGargill had noted he would be willing to speak to him as regards highways issues after the Committee meeting, and accordingly he asked that the application be rejected, or conditionally approved until discussions as regards highways issues and his concerns had been understood.

The Chairman thanked Mr D Harris and asked Mr G Elliott, local resident to speak in objection to the application. 

Mr G Elliott noted he was a resident of nearby bungalows at Damson Way and he had looked at the information as given by the Planning Department and while Planners had noted the application adhered to the NPPF he felt there was negative impact in terms of environment, social and the economy.  He added that a calculation as regards the number of vehicles showed 4,200 vehicles and asked had a survey been carried out looking at the impact of pollution from vehicles.  Mr G Elliott noted that this did not appear to take into account delivery vehicles and asked if it did include such could he receive a copy.  In respect of the social aspect, he noted the loss of manufacturing jobs and the increase in retail at Dragonville. 

In terms of Economy, Mr G Elliott noted that the impact of retail would be felt by Durham City, adding there already were a number of vacant shops in the City.  He concluded by making a reference to how similar out-of-town developments at Bishop Auckland had led to Bondgate being effectively defunct.

The Chairman thanked the speakers for their comments and asked the Highways Development Manager to respond to the issues raised.

The Highways Development Manager explained that in considering the application, it had been noted that the network in the area suffered queues and delays at peak times.  He noted the modelling carried out in relation to both the Mono and Kier sites and the decision of the Public Inquiry in 2003.  The Highways Development Manager added that a parallel road to Dragon Lane, from the Durham City Retail park to the A181 would be suitable mitigation to address traffic impacts from this development..  Members noted that funding had been secured via the Council’s Capital Programme to deliver the relief road, however, the scheme had not been fully costed and there is an estimated shortfall of £500,000. There would be a need for a reasonable contribution from the developer to contribute to this shortfall.  The Highways Development Manager noted that in terms of the Kier and Alexage sites there was not a left turn filter at the dragon Lane signals as it was felt that the redistribution of traffic via a relief road would mean the omission would be acceptable.  He added that the transport consultant for Standard Life had noted a left turn entrance from Dragon Lane to the site would be of benefit; however the concern was that this option would be to create a “rat run” via the Alexage development car park for vehicles wishing to avoid queuing at the traffic signals.  Accordingly, the Highways Development felt that a relief road was the best option to deal with the issues at this area.

The Chairman asked Mr J Williams, from ID Planning to speak in support of the application.

Mr J Williams noted he was Director with ID Planning, representing the applicant in respect of this planning application.  He noted he was accompanied by Mr P Owen from Optima, Highways Consultants for the applicant.

Mr J Williams explained that the site was a brownfield site, with good public transport links.  He noted that regeneration of the site would have both social and economic benefits in terms of physical development of a derelict site, around 110 new employment opportunities and the applicant agreeing to maximise the take up of these opportunities locally and has done similarly with other Local Authorities previously.

Mr J Williams noted that the Council’s Planning Department had confirmed that there had been no suitable sequentially preference sites and therefore the development would not negatively impact on the city centre and local area.  He noted an extant permission in place, albeit without food use.  Members were informed that both companies that wish to occupy the site, Lidl and The Range, were both committed to the site and to be open by Summer 2019.  Mr J Williams noted that the design for both stores was modern, in keeping with other development in the area and would feature landscaping to improve the frontage.

Mr J Williams noted positive discussions with the Council’s Highways Department, with the recommendation for approval out in the report, subject to conditions and the financial contribution in terms of a relief road, a road which would have benefits for the wider area.  He noted that the owner of the former Mono Containers site had suggested some access amendments and that work had been ongoing in terms of these and the applicant agreed to the realignment and agreed that a second access was not necessarily of benefit as it may lead to a “rat run” being created.  He also noted signage as regards no right-hand turn.

Mr J Williams noted the proposal would have economic benefits in terms of the 110 jobs created, adding the NPPF gave significant weight to the economic benefits of schemes.  He concluded by respectfully asking that the Committee support the Officer’s recommendation and approves the application.

The Chairman thanked Mr J Williams and asked the Senior Planning Officer if there were any issues he wish to clarify.

The Senior Planning Officer noted that in terms of the economic impact of the development on the city, colleagues from the Spatial Policy Team had looked thoroughly at the application and had been satisfied that the food aspect in addition to the extant permission were acceptable and therefore the application was recommended for approval.  He added that in relation to the junction at Sunderland Road was an Air Quality Management Area (AQMA) and that a relief road would redistribute vehicles and therefore there would be wider benefits in relation to environmental health.

The Chairman thanked the Officer and asked Members of the Committee for their comments and questions.

Councillor K Corrigan referred to the points raised by Belmont Parish Council, as set out starting at page 22 of the report, and asked for a response to those issues.  It was noted that Officers would come back, after referring to the agenda pack.

Councillor D Freeman noted that the application seemed to be an improvement of a brownfield site, although he acknowledged that there were issues in terms of the existing traffic problems.  He asked if a relief road was to be build, when would it be completed, as he felt that if more development was in place before the relief road then there could be gridlock before the needed road was completed.

The Highways Development Manager noted an application for the road would be made in September 2018, with funding secured and it being not unrealistic that the road could be in place by 2020.  He added in terms of the comments from Belmont Parish Council, he noted the area was very busy, though in general vehicles would remain on main roads, not residential areas.  He added in terms of parking concerns, residents parking would be provided and there would be plenty of parking provided for customers within the development site, and cycle parking was dealt with by condition.

The Senior Planning Officer noted that in relation to the concerns raised by Belmont Parish Council, there would be a Construction Management Plan, with Heavy Goods Vehicles (HGVs) being directed via this, there were conditions relating to noise levels, and also there was a dust management plan.

Councillor J Blakey asked if the aerial plan indicting the new relief road could be shown on the projector screens, the Senior Planning Officer brought the plan up on the screen.  The Highways Development Manager explained the proposed link road would go from Renny’s Lane down to Damson Way, and also there would be a triangular arrangement at the junction with the A181, south of Damson Way.  Councillor J Blakey noted she was familiar with the area and noted a lot of speeding traffic and asked if there would be new limits to address this.  The Highways Development Manager noted there was a 30mph limit in place currently and therefore there was no further issue in this regard.

The Chairman noted that speakers and members of the public may not debate across the floor of the Council Chamber and that they should place their trust in the elected Members of the Committee to determine the application.

Councillor P Jopling noted that traffic was extremely bad in the area and her worry was the time-lag in delivery of a relief road in comparison to the development and asked if there was any way to condition that the road was in place first.  The Senior Planning Officer explained that the recommendation as set out in the report was for a financial contribution towards a relief road, with the previous comments from the Highways Development Manager describing how this would be delivered.  He added the condition was as regards securing a financial contribution, not in proposing timescales.  Councillor P Jopling noted a desire for the businesses to be in place Summer 2019; however the road may not be for a year after that.  The Highways Development Manager noted there was not a programme of works at this point, with funding being drawn together, reiterating that approval would be sought in September 2018.

The Chairman understood the disappointment of Members in terms of the funding and the programme relating to the relief road, however, he noted that was not what was before Members for determination, rather the application as set out within the agenda papers.

The Solicitor - Planning And Development, Clare Cuskin noted that the details of the relief road were separate from the application, with the Highways Section having acknowledged the need for a relief road.  She noted that while it may be possible to condition as regards the road, she did not recommend this as she felt that an appeal as regards removal of such a condition would be likely to be successful.

Councillor D Brown noted he had attended the site visit and felt that the sooner the site was tidied up and brought back into use the better, providing benefits for the immediate area and the wider Durham City area.  He understood the issues in relation to traffic, however, he felt that the application should be approved and moved the Officer’s recommendations as set out in the report.

Councillor D Freeman seconded the proposal.

RESOLVED

That the application be APPROVED subject to the completion of a Section 106 Legal Agreement and the conditions detailed in the Officer’s report to the Committee.