Agenda item

The planning application was for the construction of a two storey side extension on the land adjacent to 2 St Martins Street, Millfield, Peterborough, comprising a retail (Class A1) unit at ground floor and a one-bed residential unit at first floor. The application was a re-submission.

It was officer’s recommendation that planning permission be refused, for the reasons set out in the report. The Principal Development Management Officer provided an overview of the application and highlighted a number of key issues within the report.

Councillor Peach and Councillor Shearman, Ward Councillors, addressed the Committee and responded to questions from Members. In summary the key points highlighted included:

·         Councillor Peach noted that the applicant had addressed the concerns raised by the Committee during prior consideration, including improving access to bin storage.

·         It was believed that this application would assist in addressing a number of existing issues at the site, including drug taking, fly tipping and prostitution. The gates to the site had been locked for a number of years.

·         Parking was available in the form of laybys on either side of Lincoln Road.

·         All the Ward Councillors were in favour of the application and it was suggested that the proposals were supported by local residents.

·         Councillor Shearman did not believe that parking was a substantial issue. The application was within Zone M (residents’ parking) where residents could not expect to park their car outside their residence.

·         It was further noted that ample parking was available along adjacent roads.

·         It was suggested that a delivery vehicle entering and leaving the site to load and unload would be more dangerous than a vehicle parking on the road.

·         It was considered that the development would enhance the local area and that to refuse the application would go against the principles of the CanDo operation, which was active in the area.

·         It was not believed that one additional delivery vehicle would have any additional cumulative impact onto of the pre-existing delivery vehicles and bin collections.

Mr Iqbal, local resident, addressed the Committee in objection to the application and responded to questions from Members. In summary the key points highlighted included:

·         Mr Iqbal advised that he ran a business at 287 Lincoln Road, which backed on to the application site. He further advised that he had a civil right to park his vehicle on the site. This would not be possible if the application was allowed.

·         The site was used during the loading and unloading of deliveries and been used for such for 15 years.

·         Mr Iqbal had not had access to the site while it had been locked, however had discussed the matter with his solicitor. He believed he had a legal right to access the land.

The Planning and Highways Lawyer advised that any potential private access rights of individuals over land were not material planning considerations. Such matters could not be considered by the Committee as they were civil matters for the individual parties to pursue.

Mr Shahid Anwar, Applicant, and Mr Mohammed Iqbal, Agent, addressed the Committee in support of the application and responded to questions from Members. In summary the key points highlighted included:

·         Mr Anwar commented that a number of compromises had been made by the applicant following pre-application advice.

·         The proposal had altered following previous refusal by Planning Committee. The application now consisted of a one bedroom flat, a wider bin storage access and amenity space for the residence provided.

·         It was suggested that applications in the near vicinity had been permitted without objections on highways grounds. Similarly, applications had been permitted with similar appearance and design.

·         The proposal was believed to be a positive use of the space, rather than the current negative use being made.

In response to a question from the Committee, the Principal Engineer (Highways) advised that the key focus for retail developments was the provision for the loading and unloading of deliveries. St Martins Street was a residents parking zone, with a pedestrian crossing. There was an existing lack of loading and unloading facilities, which this application would exacerbate. It was further advised that double yellow lines restricted parking, but not loading or unloading.

The Committee discussed the application. It was noted that each individual application was considered on its own merits and decisions were guided by Council policy.

A motion was proposed and seconded to agree that permission be granted, contrary to officer recommendation, subject to relevant conditions, as the proposal fit in well within the mixed street scene, there were no parking or highways issues raised by the development, and the provision for bin storage and access were acceptable. The motion was carried 7 voting in favour and 3 voting against.

RESOLVED: (7 voted in favour and 3 voted against) that planning permission is GRANTED, subject to relevant conditions, for the reasons set out below.

Reasons for the decision

The proposal was considered to fit in well within the mixed street scene. It was not considered that the proposal raised any parking or highways issues, and the provision for bin storage and access was believed to be acceptable.