Agenda item

That planning permission be granted subject to the conditions detailed in the report of the Chief Officer (Planning and Environment), with condition 16 being amended to include the provision of appropriate on-site parking for employees, and subject to the applicant entering into a Section 106 Obligation or Unilateral Undertaking to secure the following:-

-       Ensure the payment of £4,000 towards the Authority’s costs of consultation and making of a traffic regulation order to restrict on-street parking

The Committee considered the report of the Chief Officer (Planning and Environment) in respect of this application.  The usual consultations had been undertaken and the responses received detailed in the report.  Additional comments received since the preparation of the report were circulated at the meeting. 

            The officer detailed the background to the report and referred Members to the late observations where two additional conditions on landscaping were included.  He spoke of the main issues to consider which included the highway and wildlife implications and the effects upon the character and appearance of the area.  The proposed two access points were considered acceptable and the car parking provision was in accordance with the maximum standards in the Local Planning Guidance.  However there was a shortfall of nine in the number of places compared to the proposed number of employees and a travel plan had been requested as a condition if the application was approved, which would force the operator to consider other means of transport. 

            Mr. C. Sparrow spoke in support of the application and said that the land had been purchased due to the rapidly expanding business.  The building would be designed to create a modern comfortable building and local labour would be used during the construction of the building.  He referred to proposals for green travel plans and in noting the condition requested in the late observations, said that it was anticipated that employees would park on the site but he hoped that they would not be restricted from parking elsewhere if needed.                 

            Councillor Chris Bithell proposed the recommendation for approval which was duly seconded.  He said that there were no grounds to refuse the application but raised concern about the parking problems in the area.  He felt that the production of a travel plan was a pointless exercise and suggested that future developers on the site consider parking underneath the building.  Councillor Richard Jones welcomed the proposal but concurred with Councillor Bithell about the problems of parking. 

            The Chairman exercised his discretion to allow the Local Member, Councillor David Mackie, to speak on the proposal.  Councillor Mackie felt that the parking situation in the whole area would get worse in the future and asked Members to include the condition that vehicles of users of the building must park within the site.

            Councillor Mike Peers said that there was a need to be satisfied that the users of the building did not park their vehicles on the road which would add to the already difficult parking problems.  The number of spaces provided in the proposal was insufficient for the proposed number of employees and Councillor Peers therefore welcomed the suggestion for an additional condition.  Councillor Richard Jones felt that the condition would not be enforceable and referred to the Section 106 for the payment of £4000 towards the consultation and making of a traffic regulation order to restrict on-street parking, which he felt would help to reduce the problem. 

            In response to the comments made, the officer said that the travel plan would be monitored and could be enforced unlike the condition proposed by Councillor Mackie.  The Senior Engineer - Highways Development Control reminded Members that the number of parking spaces was based on the floor area of the building and not the proposed number of employees.  The Development Manager said that the parking provision did meet the Council’s standards and referred to a recent application on adjoining land which had also included less parking spaces than the number of employees. If this was of concern to Members he suggested that condition 16 could be amended to include the provision of appropriate on-site parking for employees. 

            Councillor Marion Bateman felt that there was an opportunity within the Local Development Plan (LDP) to look at individual sites and consider providing a ‘Park and Ride’ service.                  

            RESOLVED:

            That planning permission be granted subject to the conditions detailed in the report of the Chief Officer (Planning and Environment), with condition 16 being amended to include the provision of appropriate on-site parking for employees, and subject to the applicant entering into a Section 106 Obligation or Unilateral Undertaking to secure the following:-

-       Ensure the payment of £4,000 towards the Authority’s costs of consultation and making of a traffic regulation order to restrict on-street parking