Agenda item

County Councillor D. Evans left the meeting before this application was considered and did not return.

 

We considered the application and late correspondence, which was recommended for approval subject to the 25 conditions, and subject tothe revised S106 Agreement covering previous requirements, as outlined in the report.

 

The local Member for Priory ward, attending the meeting by invitation of the Chair, outlined the following points:

 

·         Having undertaken surveys in his ward there has been considerable community pressure for the application to be determined in favour of the development taking place.

 

·         A local resident has asked that a bus stop be located near to the proposed supermarket.

 

·         The local Member has sympathy with the representations made by Abergavenny cycle group and had indicated his support. It was considered that a new way of looking at cycleways in Abergavenny town was required.

 

·         Abergavenny Transition Town – The local Member would encourage the Applicant to use local suppliers wherever possible.

 

·         Abergavenny Civic Society has submitted representations.

 

·         Overall, the local Member supports the application but would encourage the applicant to engage with local societies to address any outstanding concerns.

 

Councillor C. Woodhouse, representing Abergavenny Town Council, attended the meeting by invitation of the Chair and outlined the following points:

 

·         It has been 12 years since tenders were opened for the development of the Market Site.

 

·         It is estimated that in this twelve year period, each year £20M of Abergavenny money has been spent out of town.

 

·         The Town Council had recently voted in favour of this application. However, some amendments are requested, namely:

 

-       The throughway between Lion Street and Market Street needs to be visible to encourage people to shop at the supermarket and also within the town.

 

-       The blank walls of the proposed development could be adorned with a mural indicating the Abergavnny Food Festival, the Cycling Festival and the Steam Rally, for example, to show a sense of belonging to the people of Abergavenny.

 

-       Abergavenny could help to part finance this with the Applicant and partners.

 

-       The use of more stone would brighten up the development and make it look more rural.

 

-       The Active Travel Act – The Cycle Group would like to see the walkway on the western side of the development to be a joint space.

 

-       The Town Council has concerns regarding the crossing on Park Road and considers that this needed to be made safer.

 

-       There is a need to have a pre-Morrison’s and post Morrison’s traffic assessment so that the repercussions of the proposed development may be identified.

 

Mr. P. Hannay, Chair of the Abergavenny Transition Town, representing various objectors to the application, attended the meeting by invitation of the Chair and outlined the following points:

 

The objectors would like to see the following firm conditions put on this application:

 

·         There should be a cast-iron condition that the scheme will be made to comply with best practice of the legally binding Active Travel Act 2013. Currently, as the Abergavenny Cycle group and Sustrans submission shows, it doesn’t comply. They recommend improvements to routes across the site and the new A40 road junction. Their advice should be heeded.

 

·         In the light of the above, the applicant needs to re-think both the width, geometry, and surfacing of the two current north –south new pedestrian routes on the site, to eliminate the curvilinear one, and to give preference to a primary 4 metre wide pedestrian route connecting the end of Market Street and the town centre to Bailey Park and the Fairfield, along the edge of the supermarket. This should be the principal route for all non-car users. This should visually organise the site, not the car-runs of the car park and it should ideally be tree-lined.

 

·         The hard surfacing strategy of the whole site and its material vocabulary is confused and contradictory. The strategy should take its cue from the high quality design investment of ‘Brewery Yard’ opposite the site and be executed the length of Lion Street as well.

 

·         The Lion Street site perimeter should become fully permeable to pedestrians opposite the Brewery yard entrance to maximise pedestrian travel between the rest of the town and the site.

 

·         The Planning Committee should demand the re-instatement of the 20% non-food retail limit which has been swept away in the Evaluation - paragraph 5.1.5, even though Monmouthshire County Council policy states in 4.1.10that it should be kept.  ‘Retailing is about competition’, states the officer’s report. There is no updated retail impact report and yet the officer claims there is no evidence to suggest that the town centre is vulnerable.  Not a thought is given either, to food traders in the Market Hall. The 20% limit should be re-instated.

 

·         The form and material of the buildings require a rethink. The very poor embodied energy performance of the buildings materials and the lack of renewable energy components, as would be expected by Welsh Government, should be replaced by a timber-framed and timber-clad, pitched roof, urban ‘Market Hall’. The Market Town of Brecon as an aspiration could be a benchmark. 

 

The objectors’ actual evidence to back all this is as follows:

 

Welsh Government Highways who approved the earlier road scheme and the current one, says in paragraph 4.1.2 - quote “the applicant is looking at issues relating to the Active Travel Act”. Looking at, is not good enough. Please act on the best advice.

 

The Design Access statement 29^th July 2016 states “Hard materials detailing of footpath surfaces, will match those of the Brewery Yard Development”. This changes in the later D+A statement 11^th November to ‘’will match those of Market Street” : Market street is not a priority pedestrian route in a car park. Brewery Yard is. That should be replicated.

 

Transport, Policy S1 of the LDP includes:

 

 “Reducing the need to travel, especially by car;”

“Promoting public transport, walking and cycling;”

“Minimising the adverse effects of parking;”

 

The applicant’s transport consultants state “It shows that the majority of Abergavenny is accessible within a maximum two kilometre walking distance, thus providing a great opportunity for both staff and customers to walk to the store.” It says positive precise things about cycling too.

 

However, what is actually offered is an out-of-town suburban shed serviced by a car park completely undermining that policy. There is no hard landscaping detailed plan submitted with pedestrian priority, only a soft landscaping plan. The current condition no 7 regarding this issue, is ‘flabby’. The visuals submitted in the applicant’s November D+A statement, show tarmac and zebra crossings in a car park.

 

 

Finally, this is a once in a lifetime opportunity to make the largest new building in Abergavenny probably for a century, live up to the majesty of the Market Hall and Town Hall, the Chapel in Market Street, and the finely composed domestic and working buildings of Market, Lion and Monk Street that surround this site. The Planning Committee has a chance to do the right thing. Please heed these bodies’ advice and impose these conditions.

 

The Applicant’s agent, Mr. C. Creighton, attending the meeting by invitation of the Chair, outlined the following points:

 

·         Morrison’s wants to be a part of a very successful wider town centre.

 

·         The applicant has looked at how this new store will fit into Abergavenny in terms of scale, linkages, traffic and design.

 

·         In terms of scale, the store has been designed to be able to compete with large out of town supermarkets that are taking trade away from Abergavenny but also has to be of an appropriate size for the site, the population of the town and its catchment.

 

·         What is being proposed is slightly smaller than the Waitrose store but about twice the size of the Tesco store.

 

·         A centrally located, well linked food store can strengthen a town centre by providing new customers and increase footfall to existing businesses.

 

·         In terms of linkages the north / south route through the site has been retained with significant tree planting.

 

·         There will be a three way crossing over the Park Road crossing.

 

·         Cycle provision has been looked at and discussions have been held with the Welsh Assembly with a view to providing safe cycling lanes. Details of this will be available in the Section 278 Agreement to be signed with the Welsh Assembly.

 

·         The applicant wants to encourage people who come to the store to also visit local shops and services within the town centre.

 

·         The development provides 233 new centrally located parking spaces.

 

·         The design of the development is a clean crisp contemporary building with significantly more glazing than on the previous application, allowing visitors to connect visually with Abergavenny.

 

·         The store has a feature entrance using some of the stone reclaimed from the demolition of the old buildings from the cattle market.

 

·         The scheme presented to Planning Committee satisfies all polices, provides a deliverable scheme that will provide an attractive well designed new food store of which Morrison’s and Abergavenny can be proud.

 

A Planning Committee Member representing a ward in Abergavenny Town outlined the following points against the application:

 

·         Endorsed the views expressed by the Chair of Abergavenny Transition Town with regard to the conditions outlined.

 

·         The store is an out of town store.

 

·         It has taken 12.5 years to reach this application stage.

 

·         Many people in Abergavenny are against this development.

 

·         Abergavenny now has three supermarkets located within the town.

 

·         A condition regarding the percentage of non food and food needs to be added to ensure the correct mix and to avoid creating a detrimental effect to businesses in the town, if the application is approved.

 

·         Cannot support a café located within these premises. There are seven different eating establishments located close to the proposed store.

 

·         There is a need to see traffic improvements to Park Road with a view to this road being able to cope with increasing traffic.

 

·         Section 106 Agreement – There was a need to undertake a proper development of Lion Street.

 

·         Valuable suggestions have been made by the Civic Society and Abergavenny Transition Town which should be heeded.

 

Other Planning Committee Members representing wards in or close to Abergavenny Town outlined the following points in favour of the application:

 

·         The town has grown in recent years and residents have been asking for a superstore to be located within the town for a number of years.

 

·         Walking into the Town from the various car parks in Abergavenny has occurred for many years.  The development, if approved, will not hinder this process.

 

·         The proposed development will be a great asset for the Town and encourage local people to shop in the town rather than go elsewhere.

 

·         Morrison’s has chosen to invest in Abergavenny which is a good accolade for the town and for Monmouthshire.

 

In response to questions raised, the Head of Planning, Housing and Place Shaping stated that:

 

·         The Active Travel Act complies in terms of the junction. Welsh Government will be providing approval for the trunk road improvements.

 

·         With regard to the North / South link, officers are working with the applicant to ascertain whether it may be three metres in width.

 

·         Energy performance will be addressed via building regulations.

 

·         A 20% food retail limit has not been recommended by officers as the site is a town centre location and therefore would not be looking to restrict retail use within the town centre.  Within a town centre the Authority cannot look at issues of competition.

 

·         Section 106 clarification – Parking at the superstore would be controlled by the Authority via a Section 106 Agreement and would adhere to the terms and conditions of the County Council’s car parks.

 

Having considered the report of the application and the views expressed, it was proposed by County Councillor P. Murphy and seconded by County Councillor M. Powell that application DC/2016/00895 be approved subject to the 25 conditions, and subject to the revised S106 Agreement covering previous requirements, as outlined in the report.

 

Upon being put to the vote, the following votes were recorded:

 

For approval              -           10

Against approval      -           1

Abstentions               -           0

 

The proposition was carried.

 

We resolved that application DC/2016/00895 be approved subject to the 25 conditions, and subject tothe revised S106 Agreement covering previous requirements, as outlined in the report.

 

Note:

 

At the end of the meeting the Head of Planning, Housing and Place Shaping provided the Committee with the following information:

 

As drafted, the opening hours condition for Sundays would be illegal due to Sunday trading laws.  The store could only open for six hours between 10.00am and 6.00pm.  The condition to reflect the allowed band will be amended accordingly, but there is no need to specify a six hour slot as that is covered by other legislation.  Similarly, there is no need to refer to Christmas Day or Easter Day as other legislation covers that.