DEVELOPMENT MANAGEMENT PANEL 15 JULY 2013 Case No: 1201777FUL (FULL PLANNING APPLICATION) Proposal: REMOVAL OF PUMP AND CANOPY FROM FORECOURT.

CHANGE OF USE OF SHOWROOM SIDE OF GARAGE TO CONVENIENCE STORE WITH ADDITION OF TWO PORTACABINS FOR STORAGE USE

Location: ROBINSONS GARAGE THRAPSTON ROAD Applicant: ROBINSONS GARAGE Grid Ref: 509855 267991 Date of Registration: 15.11.2012 Parish: KIMBOLTON

RECOMMENDATION - APPROVAL 1. DESCRIPTION OF SITE AND APPLICATION 1.1 This application relates to the Robinsons Garage that is located to the

north of the Thrapston Road and to the north west of the High Street. The High Street has a number of local small units made up of individual retailers, some office uses also exist. The area close to the garage is predominately residential with dwellings of mixed age and design. A grade II listed building lays directly to the west of the garage. The classified road (B645) serves as the access road to the site. The river Kym lays to the north of the site.

1.2 The garage site currently hosts petrol pumps in a covered forecourt

area with the main building set back from the highway. There is currently a small store within the building, and a vehicle repairs business also exists.

1.3 The application seeks permission to change the use of part of the

main building to a convenience store following the removal of the pumps and canopy. In addition two temporary buildings are proposed to the rear and west of the main building. The temporary buildings will be raised and accessed by a platform.

2. NATIONAL GUIDANCE 2.1 The National Planning Policy Framework (2012) sets out the three

dimensions to sustainable development - an economic role, a social role and an environmental role - and outlines the presumption in favour of sustainable development. Under the heading of Delivering Sustainable Development, the Framework sets out the Government's planning policies for : building a strong, competitive economy; ensuring the vitality of town centres; supporting a prosperous rural economy; promoting sustainable transport; supporting high quality communications infrastructure; delivering a wide choice of high

quality homes; requiring good design; promoting healthy communities; protecting Green Belt land; meeting the challenge of climate change, flooding and coastal change; conserving and enhancing the natural environment; conserving and enhancing the historic environment; and facilitating the sustainable use of minerals.

For full details visit the government website http://www.communities.gov.uk and follow the links to planning, Building and Environment, Planning, Planning Policy. 3. PLANNING POLICIES 3.1 Further information on the role of planning policies in deciding

planning applications can also be found at the following website http://www.communities.gov.uk then follow links Planning, Building and Environment, Planning, Planning Information and Guidance, Planning Guidance and Advice and then Creating and Better Place to Live

3.2 Huntingdonshire Local Plan (1995)

Saved policies from the Huntingdonshire Local Plan 1995 are relevant and viewable at www.huntingdonshire.gov.uk/localplan95

• En2:“Character and setting of Listed Buildings” - indicates

that any development involving or affecting a building of architectural or historic merit will need to have proper regard to the scale, form, design and setting of that building

• En25: "General Design Criteria" - indicates that the District

Council will expect new development to respect the scale, form, materials and design of established buildings in the locality and make adequate provision for landscaping and amenity areas.

• En27: “Shopfront design” – Council will seek good standards

of shopfront design by having regard to the character of the building and the street scene to which it relates

• E7: “Small Businesses” will normally be supported subject to

environmental and traffic considerations.

• E11: “Expansion of Existing Firms” – will normally be allowed providing the scale and location of development does not conflict with other Local Plan policies.

• S2: “Individual Shopping Proposals” – need to be satisfactory

in terms of siting, design, car parking, servicing, accessibility by car, foot, cycle and public transport, environmental impact, conservation, alternative use of the land and any other relevant Local Plan policies.

• S7: “Local Shopping Facilities” – to serve existing housing

areas will be allowed providing they do not conflict with other Local Plan policies.

• S16: “Local Shopping Facilities” – proposals for new shops or

the partial conversion of existing buildings or dwellings within

existing built up areas or in the villages will be considered on their individual merits.

• S17: “Retention of Existing Shopping Facilities in Villages” –

will be supported and where necessary will encourage the dual or multi-use of commercial or other premises in order to secure some local shopping provision.

• CS9: “Flood water management” – the District Council will

normally refuse development proposals that prejudice schemes for flood water management.

3.3 Huntingdonshire Local Plan Alterations (2002) Saved policies from

the Huntingdon Local Plan Alterations 2002 are relevant and viewable at www.huntingdonshire.gov.uk/localplan - Then click on "Local Plan Alteration (2002)

• None relating to this development

3.4 Adopted Huntingdonshire Local Development Framework Core

Strategy (2009)

• CS1: “Sustainable development in Huntingdonshire” – all developments will contribute to the pursuit of sustainable development, having regard to social, environmental and economic issues. All aspects will be considered including design, implementation and function of development.

3.5 Draft Huntingdonshire Local Plan to 2036: Stage 3 (2013)

• Policy LP 6 ‘Flood Risk and Water Management’ Flood Risk A proposal will be supported where:

a. it is located in an area that is not at risk of flooding with reference to the Environment Agency flood risk maps and the Council's Strategic Flood Risk Assessment (SFRA), unless a Sequential Test, and if necessary an Exception Test, as set out in the NPPF's technical guidance on flood risk, proves the development is acceptable; b. suitable flood protection/ mitigation measures can be agreed as appropriate to the level and nature of flood risk and satisfactorily implemented and maintained; and c. there will be no increase in the risk of flooding for properties elsewhere, e.g. through a net increase in surface water run-off, or a reduction in the capacity of flood water storage areas, unless suitable compensation or mitigation measures exist or can be agreed, satisfactorily implemented and maintained.

• Policy LP 9 ‘Development in Key Service Centres’

A retail scheme including 600 square metres or less of net floorspace will be supported where it is appropriately located within the built-up area of the Key Service Centre where the scale and type of development proposed is directly related to the role and function of the locality.

• Policy LP 13 ‘Quality of Design’ A proposal will need to be designed to a high standard based on a thorough understanding of the site and its context.

• Policy LP 15 ‘Ensuring a High Standard of Amenity’

A proposal will be supported where a high standard of amenity is provided for existing and future users and residents of both the surroundings and the proposed development.

• Policy LP 17 ‘Sustainable Travel’

A proposal will be supported where it is demonstrated that: a. opportunities are maximised for the use of sustainable travel modes; b. traffic volumes can be accommodated and will not cause significant harm to the character of the surrounding area; c. any adverse effects of traffic movement to, from and within the site including the effect of car parking is minimised; d. a clear network of routes is provided that provides connectivity and enables ease of access, to, around and within the proposal and with the wider settlement for all potential users, including those with impaired mobility; and e. safe and convenient pedestrian and cycle routes, including links to new and existing services, facilities, footpaths, bridleways and the countryside are provided where appropriate and if possible formalised as rights-of-way. A proposal will be supported where it incorporates appropriately designed vehicle and cycle parking with a clear justification for the level of provision proposed, having regard to: a. the potential to increase the use of alternative transport modes including public transport, walking and cycling; highway safety; b. servicing requirements; c. the needs of potential users; and d. the amenity of occupiers of nearby properties.

• Policy LP 23 ‘Local Services and Facilities'

A range of available land or buildings for local services and facilities in a settlement or neighbourhood of a market town is essential to maintain its sustainability. For the purposes of this policy local services and facilities include shops, public houses, places of worship, filling stations, public halls and community, cultural, education and health care facilities. A proposal for an additional service or extension of an existing one will be supported where: a. it is of a scale to serve local needs without having an adverse impact on a designated town centre; or b. it involves a change of use to reinstate a local service or facility A proposal which involves the loss of a local service or facility will only be supported where: c. there is no reasonable prospect of that service or facility being retained or restored; or d. an equivalent service or facility will be provided in a location with an equal or better level of accessibility for the community it is intended to serve.

A proposal which anticipates such a loss will provide evidence that: e. there is insufficient community support for continuation of the service or facility; or f. reasonable steps have been taken to effectively market the property for its current use to establish whether there is any realistic prospect of maintaining the service or facility.

• Policy LP 31 ‘Heritage Assets and their Settings’ Great weight is given to the conservation of any heritage asset; more weight is accorded to assets of greater significance. A proposal which affects the special interest or significance of any heritage asset or its setting must demonstrate how it will conserve, and where appropriate enhance, the asset. Any harm must be fully justified and this harm will be weighed against the public benefit of the proposal. Substantial harm or loss will require exceptional justification. Harm to assets of the highest significance will require wholly exceptional justification.

Local policies are viewable at https://www.huntingdonshire.gov.uk 4. PLANNING HISTORY 4.1 0100204OUT demolition of the garage for residential development

approved 25.6.01 4.2 0402052S73 variation of condition 2 of the permission in 2001 to

allow for additional time of REM application approved 18.8.08 5. CONSULTATIONS 5.1 Kimbolton Parish Council – recommend approval, subject to

Highways Officers satisfied that parking and turning can be achieved. (COPY ATTACHED).

5.2 County Highways – No objection 5.3 Environment Agency – No objection, subject to conditions that

require the removal of the tanks, a remediation strategy, and verification report, and notification of any contamination found during the development, by means of a remediation strategy being submitted to the LPA.

5.4 HDC Environmental Health – No objection subject to a condition

requiring notification of any contamination found during the development.

6. REPRESENTATIONS 6.1 Two letters of objection have been received in response to the

application, the concerns raised include:

* The potential retail impact on the High Street/local traders * Is this an appropriate development for the village

* Loss of petrol station facilities * Noise and anti social hours * New signage * Odour from potential cooking on site

7. SUMMARY OF ISSUES 7.1 The main issues to consider with this proposal are the principle of the

development, the appearance of the proposed new shop front in relation to the adjacent listed building, neighbour amenity, highway safety, flood risk and land contamination.

Principle: 7.2 The site is located north west of the High Street which hosts a

number of independent small scale stores. The site is located to the north west of the main High Street on the northern side of Thrapston Road, within the residential area of the village.

7.3 This application seeks to change the use of the car sales room at

Robinsons Garage, which at present operates as a petrol filling station and MOT centre. The small supermarket is proposed to operate from the car sales area and the parking area will be provided once the canopy and petrol pumps have been removed.

7.4 The main thrust of recent National planning policy contained in the

National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF), is a presumption in favour of sustainable development. It makes it clear in the approach towards employment uses that a flexible approach should be taken when considering planning applications for business uses. Whilst the NPPF also suggests that Local Planning Authorities should guard against the unnecessary loss of valued facilities and services, the applicant has suggested the filling station is no longer viable as a business enterprise. Policies S2, S7, S16 and LP8 provide support for a retail proposal of this scale in this location. In terms of the new business creating a sustainable environment and having regard to the NPPF, the site is located close to the High Street where residents are likely to walk to the supermarket. Regard has been taken to the other smaller scale businesses in the village, however, there is no other supermarket in the village, and the other stores are smaller independent stores, which, due to the small scale of this site should not be affected in terms of their viability and contained success.

7.5 The principle of a small scale supermarket is considered to be in line

with the principles in the NPPF, as it will create an employment use in a sustainable location to the benefit of the local community in creating a shopping facility, albeit at a relatively small scale.

Impact on the character of the area: 7.6 The appearance of the new shop front will remain mostly as the

existing situation, with minor alterations to the fenestration to allow for

a new entrance at the front of the store. The alterations have been carefully considered in terms of their appearance. The main building will screen the proposed new temporary buildings that will be used for storage and there is no objection to the overall changes to be made to facilitate the new use. The application is in line with Policy En2 and En27 of the Local Plan 1995, and Policies LP13 and LP23 of the Local Plan - 2036.

Neighbour amenity: 7.7 The store is proposed to operate similar times to the garage, opening

from 6:30am – 10pm, Mon – Sat and 7:30am – 9pm on Sundays. A condition will be applied to any permission to ensure the opening times of the new retail use will be controlled. The opening times are considered to be reasonable in terms of any additional noise and disturbance to the local residents that may be caused from people visiting the store. The development is considered to be in accordance with policies S2 and E11 of the Local Plan 1995 and LP15 of the Local Plan 2036.

Highway safety: 7.8 The application details suggest a parking area will be available at the

front of the site, with parking for the staff in an off site area as the current situation. The forms state that there are 12 spaces on site; the plan submitted suggests nine parking spaces will be available. The County Highways Officer is satisfied with the application in terms of highway safety issues. Staff parking is available in an area close to the site where Robinsons coaches park. However, the County Highways Officer’s suggestion to ensure that these spaces continue to be available for staff parking may appear to be unduly onerous as this is how the business functions at present. The Highways Officer has suggested a condition to be imposed for the on-site parking area to be laid out in accordance with the approved plan and this would be attached to any permission.

Flood Risk: 7.9 The site is located in Flood Zone 3 where there is a high probability of

flooding. The Technical Guidance in the NPPF states that the more vulnerable uses should only be permitted if the Exception Test is passed but also states that applications for changes of use should not be subject to the Sequential and Exception Tests. Shop use is classed as a less vulnerable use, and no objections have been raised from the Environment Agency in terms of the new shop use. The mitigation suggestions made in the standing advice submitted with the application are considered to be acceptable.

Contamination: 7.10 To make provision for the parking spaces at the site the existing

canopy and petrol pumps are proposed to be removed. The applicant has confirmed the under ground petrol tanks will be decommissioned in line with advice from the petroleum officer at the County Council, using the Public Health Act 1961. The advice from the County Council

suggests if the tanks are no longer to be used there are three options for the safe decommissioning which are:

1. Fill the tank with cement slurry 2. Fill the tank with RG22 Hydrophobic hard foam 3. Remove the tank from the ground.

7.11 The applicant is proposing to use either of the first two options for the

decommissioning of the tanks. 7.12 The Environment Agency (EA) is a statutory consultee to the Local

Planning Authority when considering planning applications that involve environmental issues, such as risks to the water environment. In giving their advice to the Local Planning Authority the EA have used their internal best practice document which recommends the petrol tanks are removed, as noted above under the Public Health Act 1961 in option 3, and not as the applicant has suggested as noted in 1 or 2 above.

7.13 The information from the EA confirms that as the site has been used

as a petrol filling station, there is likely to have been some spills or leaks during the operation, i.e some ground contamination. The EA suggest that by removing the fuel dispensing pumps, canopy and tanks some ground disturbance will occur, which could result in contaminants be mobilised into the River Kym. However, the applicant is opposed to this form of decommissioning due to the expense involved. The application details make it clear that the proposal is to remove the pumps and canopy only. The EA have recommended a number of conditions to be appended to the decision which will require the removal of the tanks and ensure contamination investigations take place. If it wasn’t for the removal of the tanks the grounds works to remove the canopy and the pumps would be minimal.

7.14 The HDC Environmental Health Officer has confirmed that all

environmental receptors including groundwater contamination have been fully considered in his assessment of the site. The Environmental Health Officer has questioned if indeed the proposed work would mobilise contaminants enough to warrant the conditions being imposed, and therefore questions whether the conditions recommended by the EA meet all of the tests as set out in circ.11/95 and paragraph 206 of the NPPF which are:

* necessary; * relevant to planning; * relevant to the development to be permitted; * enforceable; * precise; and * reasonable in all other respects.

7.15 In terms of conditions requiring the removal of the tanks, the

submission of remediation strategy and verification report being necessary, the circular suggests that Local Planning Authorities should ask themselves whether planning permission would have to be refused if that condition were not to be imposed. Being in mind this is an application for the change of use of a building from car show room to a supermarket with very minor works required it is questioned whether the conditions requiring the removal of the tanks, the submission of a remediation strategy and a verification report as

recommended by the EA are necessary for this development to take place. This appears unduly onerous bearing in mind that the petrol filling station use could carry on operating for many years without any regulation for possible contamination at the site. The EA also refer to these conditions being recommended as Best Practice as opposed to necessary. It is also therefore questioned whether the conditions are in fact reasonable. On balance, it is considered that the conditions suggested by the EA requiring the removal of the tanks, the submission of a remediation strategy and a verification report fall down on two of the tests as set out in the circular and NPPF, by not being necessary to allow this development and being unreasonable.

7.16 The EA have also suggested a condition that requires the submission

of remediation details, if during the development any contamination is found. This condition is in line with the advice from the HDC Environmental Health Officer. This condition is considered to be necessary and reasonable considering the proposed work involved for the change of use of the car sales room.

7.17 In coming to the above view with regard to conditions, Officers have

had regard to the NPPF which states that: to prevent unacceptable risks from pollution, planning decisions should ensure that new development is appropriate for its location; and, where a site is affected by contamination, responsibility for securing a safe development rests with the developer and/or landowner.

7.18 Having regard to applicable national and local planning policies, and

having taken all relevant consideration into account, it is recommended that planning permission should be approved in this instance, subject to conditions that meet all the applicable tests.

If you would like a translation of this document, a large text version or an audio version, please contact us on 01480 388388 and we will try to accommodate your needs. 8. RECOMMENDATION - APPROVAL subject to conditions to include the following Nonstand - Time limit Nonstand - hours of opening Nonstand - parking and turning Nonstand - contamination CONTACT OFFICER: Enquiries about this report to Linda Walker Development Management Officer 01480 388411

To: DevelopmentControl[/O=HUNTS DISTRICT COUNCIL/OU=HDC/CN=RECIPIENTS/CN=DEVELOPMENTCONTROL]; Subject: Planning ResponsesSent: Fri 12/21/2012 9:00:26 AMFrom: Kimbolton Parish CouncilTo: <developmentcontrol@huntsdc.gov.uk>Subject: Planning ResponsesDate: Fri, 21 Dec 2012 09:00:26 -0000MIME-Version: 1.0Content-Type: multipart/alternative;

boundary="----=_NextPart_000_000F_01CDDF59.9E8608C0"X-Priority: 3X-MSMail-Priority: NormalX-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.5931Disposition-Notification-To: "Kimbolton Parish Council" <kimboltonparishcouncil@btopenworld.com>X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.6157X-Antivirus: avast! (VPS 121220-1, 20/12/2012), Outbound messageX-Antivirus-Status: CleanReturn-Path: kimboltonparishcouncil@btopenworld.comX-OriginalArrivalTime: 21 Dec 2012 09:00:27.0235 (UTC) FILETIME=[9EC42330:01CDDF59]

------=_NextPart_000_000F_01CDDF59.9E8608C0Content-Type: text/plain;

charset="iso-8859-1"Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

------=_NextPart_000_000F_01CDDF59.9E8608C0Content-Type: text/html;

charset="iso-8859-1"Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

------=_NextPart_000_000F_01CDDF59.9E8608C0--

This Council considered the following applications at their meeting yesterday and their views are as stated: 1201802 Kimbolton School. Crown reduction in oak tree. Recommend approval 1201777 Robinson's Garage, Thrapston Rd, Kimbolton - Remove pumps & canopy;change of use to Budgens convenience store etc. Recommended for approval subject to the Highways Authority being satisfied as to the parking and turning arrangements.

1201781 22 Main Rd Stonely - new access and remove old. Recommend refusal as proposed access is inferior to old due to visibility and being on a slope. 1201794 Stonely Hill Farm,Main Rs Stonely. Erect greenhouse and change of use of land etc Council feels unable to comment on this due to uncertainty over Huntingdonshire District Council's policy on the extending of residential curtilage into open countryside. A request was made some time ago for clarification but none has been forthcoming and recent similar applications have not been dealt with consistently - one having been approved and one refused by Huntingdonshire District Council.Please advise your policy so that we may know how to respond. 1201751 36 Main Rd, Stonely - internal alterations & single storey extension. Recommend approval as appropriate development. 1201907 Kimbolton School. Crown thin and lift of oak tree. Recommend approval. Yours faithfully, Lionel Thatcher Clerk to the Council