Will council refuse Christchurch supermarket plans a second time? (From Thisisdorset)
When news happens send us your pictures, video and views. Text BE to 80360 or contact us by email
Will council refuse Christchurch supermarket plans a second time?
10:00am Friday 12th October 2012 in Latest
Will council refuse Christchurch supermarket plans a second time?
THREE major supermarket schemes in Christchurch have been recommended for refusal for a second time.
Officers at Christchurch Borough Council made the recommendations ahead of a pivotal planning meeting on October 23.
Members of the planning committee will decide on Quantum's mixed-use Bailey Drive proposal and an application for a Morrisons at Stony Lane.
Due to Meteor Retail Park developer Brookhouse lodging an appeal against non-determination of its scheme, members will be asked to simply endorse the reasons for refusal for the scheme.
It will be the second time the applications will go before the committee following a reversal of all decisions made at a meeting in June, where councillors went against officer advice and approved the offer for Bailey Drive.
The reasons for refusal for the schemes cite the detrimental impact on the vitality and viability of Christchurch town centre.
They also fail the so-called “sequential test” set-up by the council, which assesses schemes against the preferred Magistrates Court site.
Simon Hammond, director at Quantum, said: “We have been overwhelmed and touched by the sheer weight of community support for our mixed-use proposal at Bailey Drive.
“We would like to express our sincere thanks to residents for their support and help to make this exciting development a reality.
“At the last special planning meeting, the committee awarded Bailey Drive consent.
“It is now going back to committee because of process, not the committee's decision. Our application remains unchanged and we remain optimistic that committee members will be consistent and again award planning consent for this exciting proposal.”
John Taylor, managing director for Beagle Technology Group, said: “Since June, we have worked hard to address all of their concerns. We have lowered the building by 3.5 metres, changed deliveries to use only Stony Lane, improved the attractiveness of the scheme and offered £500,000 investment for the town centre. Together with the improvements to Stony Lane roundabout, this represents a contribution to over £1.5m.
“However, I am most disappointed about the apparent lack of support from the council for the local jobs it would safeguard and create - 600 jobs are vital for the town, especially in the current economic climate.”
Comments(5)
pugs0404
says...
10:15pm Fri 12 Oct 12
Crank
says...
8:03am Sun 21 Oct 12
woby_tide wrote:Where on the Dorsetforyou site does it say this, Woby? I fail to understand how it is lawful to turn down applications which are lodged, in favour of one not that is not. I am also, as with others, going to be very adversely affected by a supermarket on the court site (let alone what effect this will have on Waitrose and the Co-Op), in an already very noisy environment, and none of the other three sites would have the same impact on local residents as the one not applied for. If plans for this one are not submitted for as long as 12 months, the three others will be bound to have been determined by then through the appeals process. CBC cannot fend them off forever.
The biggest change this time around is that the "sequential site" has finally produced some plans showing their proposals and also committed to putting an application in within 12 months according to the documents on the Planning Committee website.
On balance it would appear that both schemes should either be jointly refused for the same reason as last time, or they would have to approve them both IMO. If they are prepared to look at the main faults with both of them i.e. traffic impacts, then they either think it will have a negative impact on traffic flow at both sides of town or it won't. If they are happy with the traffic projections then approve them both.
woby_tide
says...
3:05pm Mon 22 Oct 12
Crank wrote:It's under the Planning Committee Minutes as Appendix 4
woby_tide wrote:Where on the Dorsetforyou site does it say this, Woby? I fail to understand how it is lawful to turn down applications which are lodged, in favour of one not that is not. I am also, as with others, going to be very adversely affected by a supermarket on the court site (let alone what effect this will have on Waitrose and the Co-Op), in an already very noisy environment, and none of the other three sites would have the same impact on local residents as the one not applied for. If plans for this one are not submitted for as long as 12 months, the three others will be bound to have been determined by then through the appeals process. CBC cannot fend them off forever.
The biggest change this time around is that the "sequential site" has finally produced some plans showing their proposals and also committed to putting an application in within 12 months according to the documents on the Planning Committee website.
On balance it would appear that both schemes should either be jointly refused for the same reason as last time, or they would have to approve them both IMO. If they are prepared to look at the main faults with both of them i.e. traffic impacts, then they either think it will have a negative impact on traffic flow at both sides of town or it won't. If they are happy with the traffic projections then approve them both.
http://www.dorsetfor
you.com/media.jsp?me
diaid=176967&filetyp
e=pdf
Crank
says...
3:29pm Mon 22 Oct 12
woby_tide says...
10:09am Fri 12 Oct 12
On balance it would appear that both schemes should either be jointly refused for the same reason as last time, or they would have to approve them both IMO. If they are prepared to look at the main faults with both of them i.e. traffic impacts, then they either think it will have a negative impact on traffic flow at both sides of town or it won't. If they are happy with the traffic projections then approve them both.