Agenda item

Application for determination:

Erection of two industrial buildings.

Contact: Development Control – tel: (01452) 396783

The Principal Planning Officer presented her report which detailed an application for the erection of two industrial buildings on land at the proposed employment area on Framework Plan 5, Kingsway, former RAF Quedgeley site.

She advised that local residents had asked her to point out that recent housing development was not shown on the site plan attached to the report. She displayed photographs and plans clearly showing the new housing developments.

She advised that significant improvements had been negotiated with the applicant since the application was originally submitted including a reduction in the size and height of the proposed units, the provision of new planting around the buildings and a landscaped bund which would result in greater distances between the new buildings and the existing houses to the south.

Members were referred to the late material which contained the response and conditions proposed by the highway authority.  She advised that Unit 1 was 25 to over 38 metres from the boundary with the nearest residential property and Unit 2 was 23 to over 35 metres distant.

She advised Members that the site had outline planning permission for Classes B1 and B8 use so the principle of development was established. The application had originally sought 24 hour use but had now been amended for reduced hours after being advised that a 24 hour use could not be supported.

Conditions were proposed which would:-

·         Restrict hours of operation and deliveries;

·         Require a further noise assessment prior to first use

·         Require a management plan for deliveries.

John Cordingley, a resident of Naas Lane addressed the Committee in opposition to the application.

Mr Cordingley stated that the 2000 application had indicated units 92 metres from the nearest house and the current application following recent residential developments indicated units 32 – 92 metres from residences.  He noted that the plan attached to the report was based on the 2011 Ordnance Survey and did not show the houses north of Naas Lane.

He expressed concerns including the following:-

·         Units overbearing and obtrusive

·         Prospect of continuous noise

·         Water run from landscaped bund

·         Maintenance of bund

·         Request for mitigation to prevent flooding

·         Continue retaining wall beyond Unit 7

·         Felling mature oak trees

·         Constant traffic – HGVs to Unit 1 and vans serving the other units

·         Noise from work operations

·         Noise from air conditioning plant      

·         Noise from fork lift truck bleep

·         Exhaust fume pollution

·         Security lighting

He noted that Rudloe Drive was one of two main accesses to Kingsway and had already been damaged by heavy traffic presenting a danger to other road users.

He noted that there were vacant warehouses on the Waterwells site.

He endorsed the jobs which the proposal would create but asked Members to consider the detail of the application. He requested additional conditions to address the concerns of the Environmental Protection Manager, Quedgeley Parish Council, the Urban Design Officer and the Tree Officer.

He asked that local residents be given an opportunity to assist with the detail of the new development.    

The Chair asked for clarification of the documents referred to by Mr Cordingley. He was advised that the previous plan was only indicative and that the proposed development was closer to the southern boundary than the indicative plan had shown and that the new housing had been built since the plan was produced. The overall drainage strategy for Kingsway had been approved and a proposed condition required details specific to this application.   

The Vice Chair was advised of the detail of the noise assessment methodology and that proposed conditions 6 and 7 would provide further safeguards. He did raise some concern relating to the appropriateness of Rudloe Drive and whether it was suitable for large lorries.

Councillor Hanman was advised that the oak trees to be felled were currently the subject of Tree Protection Orders.

The Vice Chair requested that appropriate tree species be chosen for landscaping to prevent problems in the future.

Councillor McLellan suggested that loading and unloading hours in Condition 8 be amended to a start time of 09.00hrs and that Saturday afternoons,  Sundays and Public or Bank Holidays be removed from Condition 9 (operating hours).

The Development Control Manager advised that the proposed restrictions were based on typical noise levels and there was no evidence to justify further restriction.

The Solicitor confirmed the Development Control Manager’s views.

The Development Control Manager further advised that there was no evidence to offer that the proposed hours would be harmful.

An amendment was proposed to amend Condition 8 to allow for deliveries from 09.00hrs on Saturdays (not 08.00hrs as detailed within the condition); and not to allow any working at all on Sundays and Public or Bank Holidays and therefore to remove Sundays and Public or Bank Holidays from Condition 9, and this was carried.   

RESOLVED to grant approval of reserved matters, subject to no new material planning considerations being made within the consultation period which expires on 13 January with the Development Control Manager being authorised to issue the decision subject to conditions as detailed, and any others considered necessary.