Agenda item

To receive and consider the attached report of the Chief Planning Officer regarding an application for the change of use and alteration of former car sales showroom to retail unit (A1 use) and electrical wholesaler with trade counter (B8 use)

Plans, photographs and drawings were displayed at the meeting

Officers presented the report which sought a change of use and alterations of a former car sales showroom to retail unit (A1 use) and electrical wholesaler with trade counter (B8 use) at the former Prestige Car Sales Centre on Town Street Stanningley LS28

Members were informed that the application was a resubmission of a recently refused application which had been amended to overcome the previous highway reason for refusal, with Highways now being satisfied on the layout of the car parking

The level of representations which the application had attracted was reported with Members being informed that 8 individual letters of letters of objection had been received along with a 130 signature petition opposing the development, with many concerns being raised that the main retail unit would be a supermarket.  Officers stated that an A1 use was being sought for that element of the building but that competition between retailers was not a material planning consideration.  Conditions restricting the hours of use of the premises were proposed, with a closing time of 11pm for the A1 use and 6pm on the B8 use

The Panel heard representations from an objector and the applicant’s representative who attended the meeting

  Members commented on the following matters:

·  the likely number of deliveries at the site and the size of the vehicles to be used

·  the impact of the A1 unit on local shops and other retail centres close by

·  local employment provision and that this should be dealt with by way of a S106 agreement

·  the proximity of the access to the car park from Stanningley Road junction; that this would be a tight turn with concerns being expressed about this

·  whether the increased number of vehicle movements associated with the scheme had been taken into account

·  that the inclusion of a pedestrian crossing in the scheme should be reconsidered

·  that the premises had previously been in use for many years without leading to highways issues and had included an element of car maintenance so leading to greater traffic movements than that of a stand alone car showroom

The Head of Planning Services suggested that in view of the comments which had been made that determination of the application be deferred to enable further highways information relating to the number of movements in and out and the accident record at the site to be provided

A proposal to refuse the application was made and seconded on the basis of road safety. Although concerns were raised about possible anti-social behaviour, it was the view of the Head of Planning Services that a reason on this ground could not be formulated

As there was an equality of votes for and against the proposal to refuse the application, the Chair declined to use her casting vote and proposed that the application be deferred to enable further information to be provided at the next meeting on the highways issues which had been raised

RESOLVED – That determination of the application be deferred and that the Chief Planning Officer be asked to submit a further report to the next meeting which included greater detail on the traffic movements likely to be generated from the development and the accident record at the site