PROPOSAL: To allow for extended hours of delivery 0500-2300 hours Monday-Saturday and 0700-2200 hours on Sundays; variation of condition 5 of planning permission ref: 01/0041/0125/FUL (as modified by planning permission ref: 08/01358/FUL and 14/00552/FUL); and variation of condition 2 of planning permission ref: 14/00552/FUL to amend report of noise mitigation measures.

OFFICER RECOMMENDATION: Permit

10.15        This application was to allow for extended hours of delivery from 0500-2300 hours on Monday to Saturday and 0800-2200 hours on Sundays; variation of condition 5 of planning permission ref: 01/0041/0125/FUL (as modified by permission ref: 08/01358/FUL and 14/00552/FUL); and variation of condition 2 of planning permission ref: 14/00552/FUL to amend report of noise mitigation measures.  It was noted that the description of development had been amended from that within the Officer report as there was no proposal to change the hours of delivery on Sundays which would remain as 0800-2200.

10.16        The Planning Officer explained that the proposal was for an extension to the delivery hours for the Tesco supermarket in Bishop’s Cleeve to enable fresh goods to be delivered and processed in the warehouse with shelves stocked before the store opened.  The hours were to be brought forward by one hour from the previous consent from 0500-2300 Monday to Friday; she confirmed there was no change to the delivery hours on Sunday which were 0800-2200 hours.  Members were informed that a noise assessment had been submitted with the application.  The primary consideration was whether the extended operational hours would have a detrimental impact upon the amenities of nearby residents.  The Council’s Environmental Health Officer had considered the report and recommended additional noise mitigation measures including erection of an acoustic fence between the King’s Head Public House and the access road as well as the control of reversing warning beeps from vehicles; the applicant had agreed to these measures.  Whilst no public representations had been received, the Parish Council had objected to the proposal and asked for a temporary permission for a 12 month period.  From the assessment of the technical evidence provided, and the mitigation measures proposed, Officers had concluded that the proposed hours of delivery would be acceptable, therefore the recommendation was to permit the application, subject to the recommended conditions.

10.17        The Chair indicated that there were no public speakers for this item.  The Officer recommendation was to permit the application and he sought a motion from the floor.  It was proposed and seconded that the application be refused.  The proposer of the motion indicated that he lived some distance from the Tesco supermarket but could still hear the beepers of lorries on some mornings so the impact on the residents living in the flats above Mill Lane would be significantly worse, as such he did not feel it was acceptable to extend the hours and allow deliveries to begin an hour earlier at 0500 hours.  He recognised that the store had experienced difficulties in recent months due to COVID-19 but the situation seemed to be improving and the supermarket did not seem as busy as it had been.  The seconder of the motion felt that, as well as disturbance from reversing vehicles, there was already an issue with lorries travelling to and from the supermarket and numerous complaints had been made by residents living along the route into the village so introducing an earlier delivery time may only serve to exacerbate that issue.  The Technical Planning Manager indicated that the concerns raised by the proposer and seconder of the motion had not specifically been considered by the Environmental Health Officer and he suggested that it may be appropriate to seek a view from the Environmental Health Officer on the specific issues raised in relation to the flats above Mill Parade and the additional noise and disturbance that could potentially arise from vehicles coming and going.  The Chair queried whether the Environmental Health Officer could join the present meeting to give this view and the Technical Planning Manager explained that, even if the Environmental Health Officer was available, they would not be afforded the time to give a considered view, as such, a deferral would be the most pragmatic way forward to ensure Members were fully apprised of the expert consultee comments before making a decision.  In response to a query, confirmation was provided that, should Members be minded to defer on that basis, the application would be brought back to the next Planning Committee meeting.  The proposer and seconder of the motion to refuse the application indicated they would be happy to withdraw that motion and subsequently proposed and seconded that the application be deferred in order to obtain the Environmental Health Officer’s view in relation to the impact of the proposal on the residents of the flats above Mill Parade and the additional noise and disturbance that could potentially arise from vehicles coming and going.  Upon being taken to the vote, it was

RESOLVED          That the application be DEFERRED in order to obtain the Environmental Health Officer’s view in relation to the impact of the proposal on the residents of the flats above Mill Parade and the additional noise and disturbance that could potentially arise from vehicles coming and going.

10.18        The meeting was adjourned at 11:25am for a comfort break.

10.19        The meeting reconvened at 11:35am with the same Membership present except for Councillor E J MacTiernan.