Construction of a retail store (use class A1) of up to 10,475sqm gea, petrol filling station (sui generis) with an associated kiosk up to 86sqm gea, canopy and jet wash, new access/egress arrangements, car parking including replacement stadium car parking, service yard, highway and footpath works, landscaping, and other associated works (after demolition of existing structures)
Minutes:
Councillor Frank Jonas withdrew from the room due to his declaration of interest.
The City Development Manager's supplementary matters report explained that following detailed exchanges and provision of additional information by the applicant's transport consultants on a range of highways and transport issues, the conclusions of the highways authority are that a package of off-site highways and transport improvements could mitigate the impacts of the development and no highways objection is raised.
Condition 26 is proposed to be substituted with the following: "Before any service yard area is brought into use the acoustic fencing shall have been constructed to a height of 4.5m above finished floor level, with a surface mass of at least 10 kg/m2, and shall be continuous (without holes or gaps) along the alignments marked 'C' on approved drawing no.3505-PL-048RevA; and the acoustic fencing shall thereafter be retained in such condition."
An additional representation objecting to this application was received on the 06/08/2014. This raised objection on the grounds that there are already a number of Tesco stores in the area.
In relation to sustainable construction, to give a greater degree of certainty to delivery, an amended condition was now recommended to address what the scheme can presently achieve which falls just short of BREEAM "excellent" by a narrow margin, rather than what it could achieve. It is acknowledged that this would not be fully compliant with policy PCS15. Conditions 17&18 were proposed to be substituted by: "Before any part of the development is occupied, written documentary evidence shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by, the local planning authority proving that the development has achieved a minimum score of 69 in the Building Research Establishment's Environmental Assessment Method (BREEAM), including two credits in issue ENE 04 and two credits in issue TRA 03, which will be in the form of a post-construction assessment which has been prepared by a licensed BREEAM assessor and the certificate which has been issued by BRE Global, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the local planning authority."
The applicant had provided additional information pursuant to the request for a condition by the Environment Agency. The EA confirm that this Hydrogeological Risk Assessment (HRA) information meets their requirements and request amending of condition 10, for works to be carried out in accordance with the submitted HRA.
The following deputations were heard:
Mr Bentley, objecting, whose points included
· The concern of the impact on the small businesses which would suffer in the local area and he felt it was these independent providers that were providing locally sourced products rather than the large supermarkets and there would be a loss of the diversity of shops within the local area such as butchers and fishmongers which had already been lost in the Albert Road area and he felt this would be replicated in Winter Road and the Milton area generally.
Mrs Burkinshaw, attending to represent Milton Neighbourhood Forum, whose points included
· Concern regarding air pollution and increase of noise.
· She felt this would stifle the ambition of the football club and would block the views of the ground.
· The retail impact and also any jobs at the superstore would lead to losses at other shops in the area.
· She had a petition signed by over 1,000 people concerning the traffic impact on the local roads adding that the changes to the lights and the roundabout would not be sufficient to cope with the capacity, with concerns regarding emergency services access.
· The preference would be for a recreational facility at this site.
Mr Crow, whose objections included
· The flow of traffic on the roads with Fratton Road already being poorly designed and the fourth roundabout would make the situation worse on roads which already suffered from gridlock.
Mr Crook, on behalf of Sellars Properties, whose concerns included
· There were traffic flow and access problems associated with the additional roundabout for clients at the industrial estate which would undermine the regeneration there and he felt it was contrary to technical guidance. He felt access should be taken from the roundabout currently giving access to B&Q because the additional roundabout was not acceptable in its present location.
Mr Semple, objecting on behalf of Fitness First, whose points included
· There would be problems in accessing the commercial units with a need to cross queuing traffic and the access to the medical centre would be problematic for patients. He felt that the B&Q roundabout would be the most appropriate for access to the proposed Tesco store.
Mr Curtis, objecting, whose points included
· The supporters of the scheme were not local to the area and were harnessing the support for the football club and benefits to it.
· There was already gridlock along Goldsmith Avenue and there were air pollution concerns in the city.
· There was already a reduced bus service in Milton.
Mr Harmer, objecting, whose points included
· That this was in its present form contrary to policy PCS7 for the site.
· It was prejudicial to the long term aspirations for improvements to Fratton Park.
· There were no indicative drawings provided regarding the north stand development.
· He felt this was too close to the Fratton End and this was the opportunity to safeguard the future of the ground and therefore he would urge deferral.
Mr Robinson spoke on behalf of Applicant, whose points included
· There would be benefit to the football club who would be able to control their own parking for the ground and have room for future expansion.
· The Tesco store would be a key part of regeneration and the creation of 300 jobs (full and part time) which would benefit the local community and give added choice and competition in an area under-served by large food stores and he did not expect there to be significant retail impact from the proposal.
· There would be visual improvement of the land.
· Cyclist and pedestrian access was catered for.
· This would also create jobs during the construction period.
Mr Brown, appeared as a director on behalf of Portsmouth Football Club, to represent their views which included:
· This would help the future expansion of the club, providing benefits in giving car parking to the north side and had significant impact for the long term survival of the club.
· There would also be public gain through the improvements at Milton Lane.
Councillor Ken Ellcome spoke to comment as the Cabinet Member for Traffic and Transportation (and not as a member of the committee). He stressed the need for road safety and the impact there would be with the fourth roundabout causing delays on Fratton Way. He was also concerned regarding the petrol station and crowd management on match days as some fans walking towards the ground may go across the forecourt and should be routed around it. The HGVs deliveries would also have problems with access and the routes should be designed to minimise conflict between traffic, cyclists and pedestrians.
Councillor Lynne Stagg then spoke as a local ward councillor objecting on the grounds of cumulative impact with the other developments in the area having an impact on the road network (at the university's Langstone site, St James' site and St Mary's hospital). She felt there should be a full traffic impact survey undertaken and asked that consideration be deferred for this.
Councillor Darren Sanders then spoke as a local ward councillor whose concerns included the impact of traffic generated by development at Rodney Road, and that there was no improvement of public transport or encouragement of bus subsidies.
Councillor Gerald Vernon-Jackson also spoke as a ward councillor (and not as a member of the committee). His points included
· He welcomed Tesco's undertaking to keep the Crasswell Street store open.
· This proposal would give the football club room to develop and rotate the pitch.
· Transport concerns regarding Velder Avenue and Fratton Way junctions causing queuing.
· Concern regarding the noise caused by deliveries near to residential properties; he asked that consideration be given to restricting the hours of delivery between 10 pm and 7 am.
· Concern regarding alcohol being served on match days.
Councillor Luke Stubbs then spoke to raise the procedural issue if there was a deferral. This application had a 13 week determination period so an appeal could be lodged by the applicant if no decision were made. If committee members had major concerns it would be better to refuse than defer, otherwise the applicants might appeal rather than delay for a deferral, and the decision would be made by the Planning Inspectorate.
Members' Questions
In response to the questions raised regarding the highway matters, Peter Hayward from Transport & Environment spoke regarding the access design, location and suitability of toucan/signalised crossings, routes used by pedestrians and cyclists along Milton Road, as well as the passenger traffic accessibility provision of real time information regarding the local bus services.
Richard Lee, Environmental Health Manager, then spoke regarding air quality issues and he reported that the next formal assessment was being prepared and was due to be reported to council in 2015. He confirmed that the Velder Avenue/Eastern Road was one of the air quality management areas.
Questions were then raised regarding the engagement of retail consultants and it was confirmed that the greatest impact would be on the Fratton area and specifically on the Asda store. Further questions were raised regarding the noise levels and acoustic screening at the two delivery areas (HGV and internet sales) on the site and the distances between these and the residential properties. With regard to the pedestrian movements on match days the City Development Manager explained that this would be the responsibility of the stewarding by the football club although the city council did have input via the Safety Advisory Group (which was attended by the council, the police and the football club). It was noted that the Travel Plan is produced by the city council and is part of the safety certificate for Fratton Park.
Clarification was given by the legal adviser that a condition could not be attached to the permission to impose requirements relating to the football club which is not party to the application and did not own the relevant land; all conditions had to be precise, enforceable, necessary, relating to planning and to the development proposed and reasonable in all other circumstances, and that conditions could not be imposed where there were other statutory regimes of control (such as the city council's role as highway authority and the Licensing Committee regarding the sale of alcohol).
It was noted that the bus provision was part of the travel plan and the future use of Park and Ride was being discussed with the football club. It was asked if restriction could be put upon night time deliveries and whilst it was confirmed a condition could be imposed, such a condition was subject to the same considerations as others (as set out above). Officers considered such a condition was not the most effective way of dealing with the problem of noise of deliveries at night, because if they were unable to enter the site these vehicles (possibly travelling long distances which could be prone to delays preventing arrival in restricted hours) would park up elsewhere in the locality overnight, possibly to the inconvenience or at risk of the safety of other road users, so the most effective way of dealing with the problem of noisy night-time deliveries was through specifically designed acoustic barriers. On that basis a condition restricting night time deliveries was neither necessary nor reasonable.
Members' Comments
Consideration was given to whether a decision should be deferred but the legal adviser advised that the committee should have clear reasons and purpose in deferring, taking account of all the circumstances, and in particular that the applicants would be in a position to appeal, delaying the decision outside the Council's control and making it a decision for the Planning Inspectorate. Whilst members gave consideration to requesting restricting the hours of delivery it was then decided that the acoustic screening would be the most effective way of dealing with this to benefit local residents. Members asked that recommendation (2) be changed so that the delegation not be to the City Development Manager alone as if it was proposed to amend conditions these should be brought back to the committee for amendment due to the significance of this application, and concerns that the conditions should have the required effects and benefits set out in the report.
RESOLVED (1) that delegated authority be granted to the City Development Manager to grant Conditional Permissionsubject to Referral to the Secretary of State under the (Consultation) (England) Direction 2009 and prior completion of agreements pursuant to section 106 Town & Country Planning Act 1990 and section 278 Highways Act 1980 to secure the following planning obligations:
o Land for Stadium enhancements (car park, dedicated area for media vehicles and congregation/circulation areas) to be made exclusively available to PFC for these purposes
o Prepare and implement Employment and Skills Plan
o Any necessary commuted sum for future maintenance of the public footpath and possibly of landscape planting margins (if considered suitable for adoption)
o Project management and monitoring fee for the S106 Agreement (subject to agreement as to the amount of such a fee)
o Provision of lighting and CCTV camera/cabling linked to PCC control centre for monitoring of diverted Milton Lane, installed and available before first use of the (diverted) public footpath
o Upgrading of signal controls at Velder Avenue / Milton Road to provide MOVA operation.
o Refurbishment of signal controls at Goldsmith Avenue / Priory Crescent to provide MOVA operation with pedestrian detection allowing early cut off of pedestrian and CCTV coverage linked to PCC control centre.
o Provision of on road cycle lanes from Fratton Way to link with the existing facilities to the west on Goldsmith Avenue in the vicinity of Talbot Road.
o Provision of off road cycleway across site frontage to link with Toucan crossing to south on Fratton Way (including removal of 4th unused arm of existing roundabout).
o Provision of boarding platforms to facilitate easy access to bus stops on Goldsmith Avenue immediately to east of Fratton Way junction.
o Provision of real time information for bus services at stops on Goldsmith Avenue and Fratton Way linked to store atrium.
o The development of the framework travel plan to establish a series of SMART targets, monitoring mechanisms (with monitoring costs over a 5-year period of £5500 to be met by the developer, payable upon commencement of development) and remedial measures in the event that the targets are not achieved.
(2) that the City Development Manager inform the committee should conditions need to be added or amended;
(3) that delegated authority be granted to the City Development Manager to refuse planning permission if section 106 agreement has not been completed within three months of the date of the resolution.