PART 2

Applications for which PERMISSION is recommended

The Planning Consultant introduced the application as set out in the agenda papers.  He reported that two letters supporting the application had been received since the publication of the agenda pack, both from businesses showing an interest in the site if the application was approved.  The letters highlighted benefits which included: demand for this type of commercial floorspace; the site was close to the motorway; and sustainable location.  The Planning Consultant further reported that the Council’s Environmental Health Officer had reiterated that they had no objections to the application, subject to the conditions they had requested as set-out in the report.

Mr Josh Wilson, the Applicant, spoke in support of the application.

The Chair moved the officer recommendation to approve the application, and this was seconded by Councillor Andy Booth.

In response to a question from the Chair, the Planning Consultant confirmed that the footpath and bus stop would be secured via the Section 106 Legal Agreement.

The Chair invited Members to make comments and points raised included:

·         Supported the application and applauded the comments of the speaker who added weight to the application;

·         welcomed the application which would provide much needed employment in the area;

·         disappointed that the application would result in the loss of open green space;

·         considered the orientation of the proposed development was poor;

·         could not support the application and considered more could be done to improve biodiversity on the site;

·         had concerns regarding the access to and from the site onto the A299;

·         noted the applicants would provide a Building Research Establishment Environmental Assessment Method (BREEAM) “Very Good” standard but considered that was effectively just an average standing.  The Council should push the developer to provide a higher standard;

·         vehicles exiting the site could be travelling 60 mph onto the busy A299, could we propose a Traffic Regulation Order be required to lower the speed limit in the interests of safety;

·         both Kent County Council (KCC) Highways and National Highways (NH) raised no objection to the application;

·         considered that KCC Highways and NH need to look again at vehicles exiting the site and considered it was a ‘recipe for disaster’; and

·         could waiting restrictions be imposed alongside the petrol station to allow better access from the site.

In response the Planning Consultant said that with regard to Plot 4 KCC Highways had restricted that to B8 use which meant that any fast-food outlet application would require planning permission.  The KCC Highways traffic modelling had shown that most traffic would be accessing the site via the A229 Thanet Way and was safe.  Improvements had been made to the sightlines at the entrance of the site and KCC Highways had no safety concerns in respect of traffic entering or leaving the site.  Any TRO would require KCC Highways approval.  He explained that it would not be possible to request parking restrictions alongside the petrol station.

With regard to the BREEAM ‘Very Good’ standard, the Development Manager explained that it met Council Policy as set out in the Local Plan, and it would therefore be difficult to request a higher standard. 

Resolved:  That application 22/504863/FULL be approved subject to conditions (1) to (29) in the report.