COMMITTEE DATE: 05/11/2007
Application Reference: / 07/0372WARD: / Brunswick
DATE REGISTERED: / 06/06/2007
LOCAL PLAN ALLOCATION: / No Specific Allocation
APPLICATION TYPE: / Full Planning Permission
APPLICANT: / LIDL UK GMBH
PROPOSAL: / Erection of single storey detached building to form retail foodstore with vehicle and pedestrian accesses from Devonshire Road and Laycock Gate and associated 75 space car park, servicing area and landscaping.
LOCATION: / SITE AT H FEENEY TOYOTA DEVONSHIRE ROAD GARAGE, DEVONSHIRE ROAD, BLACKPOOL, FY3 8AR
------
SITE DESCRIPTION
Existing site is 0.66 hectares (6600sqm) in size and adjoins the junction of Devonshire Road and Laycock Gate and currently consists of the Harry Feeney car sales showroom with associated servicing and parking areas. The existing building is single storey and constructed of brick with metal cladding at fascia and roof level. The building has approximately 1330 square metres of floorspace with a well landscaped boundary to Devonshire Road, extensive external car parking/ display areas and the site is accessed directly from Devonshire Road. The Laycock Gate and rear boundary of the site, which backs onto Walter Robinson Court, a high rise tower block, comprises a dwarf wall and railing fence and a brick wall over 2 metres high respectively. Three storey residential properties directly face the site across Laycock Gate.
The site is unallocated in the recently adopted Blackpool Local Plan 2001-2016 and is within an area of mixed character including the new Devonshire School and the recently opened Farm Foods store.
This application was deferred from the Committee meeting on 3rd September due to the late submission of letters from Lidl (two letters, one dated 31st August and the second dated 3rd September respectively) and a letter from their agents How Planning dated 31st August. Officers did not have access to the two letters dated 31st August in advance of the meeting, as the letters were sent direct to Members, and were not therefore in a position to respond at the meeting. A summary of this correspondence is incorporated into the representations section.
Following the application deferral Officers met with the applicants and their agents on 4th October and a further letter has been received from How Planning on 23rd October (deadline day for the completion of this report) thus preventing a full response to be incorporated into this report. This latest rebuttal letter, together with a response will now be reported via the update notes.
The Committee will have inspected the site on 5th November 2007.
DETAILS OF PROPOSAL
Detailed planning application seeking approval for the demolition of the existing building and erection of a single storey food store (Class A1 retail) of some 1358 gross square metres with associated car park on approximately 5670 square metres of the site. The north east corner of the site (some 930 square metres) is excluded from the proposed development although it is shown within the applicants' prospective ownership. This site would be expected to be the subject of a second application for a non-food retail unit should the Lidl proposal be accepted. The store would be built abutting the southern boundary (Devonshire School boundary) with the front elevation facing northwards towards Laycock Gate and the 75 space car park. A glazed elevation would face Devonshire Road and the servicing area would be located rear adjoining the eastern boundary. In terms of appearance the building would consist of white rendered panels within piers with an aluminium profile sheet fascia and mono-pitch roof sloping from front to rear.
Two vehicle access points are proposed, one from Devonshire Road located 20 metres further north than the existing access (and closer to Laycock Gate) and opposite George Street. The second access into the site is shown from Laycock Gate. Existing boundary landscaping to the Devonshire Road frontage would be removed to accommodate parking spaces and replaced with new landscaping along the Devonshire Road and Laycock Gate boundaries. The height of the wall onto Laycock Gate will be reduced to 600mm high to accommodate the visibility splay for the access and the railings will be removed.
MAIN PLANNING ISSUES
Principle of Development/ Retail Policy and Impact
Impact on Residential Amenity
Vehicle Access/ Car Parking/ Accessibility
Design & Appearance of Building and Landscaping
CONSULTATIONS
Head of Transportation (Traffic & Road Management)- Original comments in relation to the application are as follows:
Signals will be necessary as Devonshire Road is a key priority road but also in terms of road safety. There is a considerable amount of detail required in terms of the layout of the right hand turning lane and the existing puffin crossing to serve the school and how this interconnects with the signal junction. Required works should link into the Urban Traffic Control system (traffic signals) at the Devonshire Road and Talbot Road junction and street lights should be up-graded at the new signal junction. The delivery entrance shown on Laycock Gate should be taken out so that the servicing access is from Devonshire Road. There are concerns that Laycock Gate is being used as a rat-run and the access through the site would make it easier for vehicles to exit onto Devonshire Road.
Further submissions have been made in relation to the access and highway safety issues and discussions are on-going at the time of writing this report. An up-date on this will be given at the meeting.
Assistant Director Street Scene & Property - The area for the food store waste disposal should not be less than 3 metres wide and less than 2 metres deep to accommodate 2 x 1280 euro bins, one of which will be a re-cycling bin
Environmental Protection (Contaminated Land) - the site was formerly a petrol station and the proposal will require a desk top study.
Environmental Protection - Having studied the application it would appear that the applicant has not provided details on any mechanical ventilation and/or refrigeration plant that are proposed to be installed at the new development. This will include outdoor condensing units for refrigeration. Furthermore, it would also appear that no information has been provided with regards to the potential increase in road traffic noise along Laycock Gate.
It is therefore, recommended that the applicant employ the services of a reputable sound consultant to undertake a detailed noise assessment, that should be submitted to this Division for further comments and recommendations. The noise assessment shall take into account the Calculation of Road Traffic Noise as well as BS4142, so as to negate any potential noise nuisance that may affect the residential properties that are within close proximity.
It would also appear that no details have been provided as to what measures have been put into place regarding early morning deliveries. There is a residential tower block adjacent and residential properties that are positioned on Laycock Gate that may be affected by the movement of HGV vehicles in the early hours.
Further details must also be provided by the applicant as to what type of artificial lighting will be used to illuminate not only the premises but in particular, the car parking area. These details need to be provided so that it can be determined whether the artificial lighting may cause a nuisance to nearby residential accommodation.
Once the afore-mentioned details have been provided then this Division will be in a position to offer a more informative response.
PUBLICITY AND REPRESENTATIONS
Neighbours notified 7th June 2007
Site Notices posted 13th June 2007
Notice in Gazette on 13th June 2007
A letter has been received from the Laycock Gate Management Company who manage Devonshire House and own 75% of the flats expressing concerns regarding the following:
- the proposal would increase traffic on Laycock Gate and on roads on the Queens Park estate and these roads are small and used as play areas by young people. The roads are therefore inadequate for an increase in traffic.
- 75 parking spaces may be inadequate and lead to over spill parking on Laycock Gate and on the residents' car park at Devonshire House.
- the objection also queries what guarantees are there that the site does not become utilised by anti-social elements of the community especially when the store is closed.
A letter of support has been received from 65 Charles Court supporting the application on a personal level and as Chairperson of the Queens Park Residents Association. It is stated that the proposal has local support. There is considerable deprivation in the area and the proposal would be a great asset to local people, including the elderly, disabled, people on low incomes and the vulnerable.
Councillor Blackburn (Member for Talbot & Brunswick) - Has expressed support for the application as the Queens Park area would greatly benefit from having a low cost provider of fresh food nearby. The only slight concern would be that deliveries are restricted to reasonable hours.
Councillor Owen (Member for Victoria) - States Lidl is largely used as the corner shop for the majority of its customers who are often in areas of social deprivation, and cannot be compared to Booths, Morrisons, Asda or Tesco. Although larger than a corner shop the nearest shop of any size is Co-op on Layton Road and the competition would do such shops a power of good. Talbot Gateway would cater for a different customer base and the two developments would subsist and thrive on their own terms.
In addition to the above 5 petitions of support have been submitted following a community consultation exercise and open day organised by the applicants. 518 people signed a petition in the Bloomfield Road Lidl store, 185 signed a petition on the open day at the application site and a further 18 signed at an open day at Devonshire School. Two of the petitions were sent to the applicants by the Queens Park Residents Association signed by 144 residents and 36 residents respectively. 200 out of 205 responses to an information letter distributed were also in favour of the proposal referring to the lack of retail food provision in the area, the need for choice, regeneration benefits of the scheme and job creation benefits (a further 16 copies of the same pro-forma have been received supporting the application).
Harry Feeney has written in support of the application. The letter states they have occupied the site for 18 years and in the last few years have effectively outgrown it. In order to grow and be competitive they have secured a new site at Whitehills which will only be possible with Lidl's proposed investment.
They are currently hampered by a small car park operating in excess of capacity and consequently many deliveries are taken from the main road. The proposed store would be better suited to the site, provide a valuable service and reduce the traffic issues, which is especially relevant given the adjoining school. The vast majority of residents support the proposal which will allow a local business to progress and provide further jobs on a more suitable site. It will also allow local investment and additional local employment.
Supporting statements submitted by Lidl. In response to the suggestion that the proposal will have serious implications to the success of Talbot Gateway the proposal has a gross floorarea of 14,500 sqft, approximately 20% the size of the 70,000 sqft afforded to the major food operator at Talbot Gateway. Lidl's offer is considerably different to the 'Big 4' so much so that many Lidl stores trade alongside a large superstore. Such fears should therefore be discounted.
Highways dialogue has continued and a conclusion is still awaited, however, should the application be granted this would be on condition that the full agreement of the Highways Department would be met. The Environmental Protection matters would be dealt with by condition as is normal practice. The report gives the false impression these issues have been ignored.
Although the site is not within a designated centre it is surrounded by a deprived area with restricted choice and low car ownership restricts travel. The application has overwhelming support from the community, which has been ignored, and social inclusion is a material consideration in PPS6 i.e. the availability to all ages and classes of good quality cheap food. It is recognised that savings made in shopping will benefit their lives in other ways due to the additional disposable income.
The subsequent letter states How Planning believe the site to be edge of centre and that the Talbot Gateway scheme is not suitable for a Lidl store as it would not achieve the Council's aspirations for the area.
How Planning’s letter of 31st August states they disagree the site is out of centre, as it is edge of centre as defined within PPS6 -'Planning for Town Centres' i.e. within 300m of a centre (there are two local centres 100m and 200m from the site). Consequently if it can be demonstrated there are no sites within town or edge of centre are available then the next step is an edge of centre location. Robust information has been provided on the sequential approach on the sites suggested by officers i.e. Hounds Hill and Talbot Gateway, neither of which is suitable. Hounds Hill is a fashion led high street proposal and Talbot Gateway will serve a wide catchment area providing a broad range of goods for main food shopping whereas Lidl serves a local catchment and is exactly what is required to serve the needs of local residents and has their overwhelming support.
The submitted quantitative assessment has been criticised by officers as it follows the Farm Foods assessment and that it does not have an appropriate catchment area and the number of variables are challenged. How completely disagree with this criticism. The information submitted has been endorsed by other local authorities and Planning inspectors as robust and reasonable. Whilst officers conclude the proposal would set a damaging precedent it is a fundamental principle of the planning system that each application should be judged on its merits. This is evidenced by the fact that the Lidl proposal is distinguished form the Farm Foods application in the officers’ report.
The report suggests a qualitative need has not been established but PP6 advises that it is about extending consumer choice particularly in areas showing signs of deprivation. What has been ignored is the qualitative need of the local residents. They consider the store much needed given its pricing policy and ease of access. Officer appraisal also belittles the fact that Lidl have considerable experience at promoting their neighbourhood supermarket concept and operate several successful stores in Blackpool. Finally a key aspect of PPS6 is local circumstances and how these can be weighed in the balance such as regeneration, employment, economic growth and social exclusion.
NEARBY APPEALS
None.
REGIONAL PLANNING GUIDANCE POLICIES
None relevant.
JOINT STRUCTURE PLAN POLICIES
Policy 16- Retail, Entertainment and Leisure Development.
ADOPTED POLICIES: BLACKPOOL LOCAL PLAN 2001-2016
LQ1- Lifting the Quality of Design
LQ2- Site Context
LQ3- Layout of Streets and Spaces
LQ4- Building Design
LQ6- Landscape Design and Biodiversity
BH2- Talbot and Brunswick Priority Neighbourhood
BH3- Residential and Visitor Amenity
BH4- Public Health and Safety
BH11- Shopping and Supporting Uses- Overall Approach
BH12- Retail Development and Supporting Town Centre Uses
BH13- District Centres
BH13- Local Centres
BH16- Proposed Shopping Development Outside Existing Frontages
AS1- General Development Requirements (Accessibility)
AS2- New Development with Significant Transport Implications
ASSESSMENT
Principle of Development/ Retail Policy and Impact
The application site is not within a designated centre in the Blackpool Local Plan and is therefore properly classified as ‘out of centre’ for retail planning purposes. The applicants claim the site can be regarded as 'edge of centre', although in other correspondence they state that it is not within a designated centre. The proposed site is neither within or edge of centre. Government Planning Policy Statement 6 (PPS6) 'Planning for Town Centres' refers to edge of centre being within 300 metres of the retail core of a town centre, a designation applied to the main shopping core of a town centre not to local centres. The Farm Foods proposal was itself acknowledged to be out of centre.
This out of centre site lies approximately 770 m from the Blackpool Town Centre boundary and around 1km from the primary retail core. It lies some 520 m from the Talbot Gateway site; 500m from the Whitegate Drive District Centre; approximately 570m south west of Layton District Centre; 100m and 200m south of two local centres on Talbot Road.; 450m from Layton Local Centre; and 450m from the designated shopping centre at Caunce Street. The retail strategy and policies of the Local Plan seek to protect these centres and enhance them. Strong centres have a key role in underpinning balanced and healthy communities and are important in promoting sustainable patterns of development.