Commercial and leisure units at Sweechbridge Road, Herne Bay

What was proposed

The application sought industrial and commercial units, a restaurant or café, indoor leisure facilities, access and landscaping.

“PROPOSAL: Erection of industrial/commercial units for use within Use Class B2, B8 and E g(i)(ii) and (iii) together with a restaurant/café Use Class E(b) and building for use in Class E(d) for indoor recreational leisure use, with associated access and landscaping…”

“APPLICATION TYPE: Full planning application…”

Officer report

The site and surroundings

The site was mostly undeveloped countryside outside Herne Bay, near commercial and residential uses, with accesses from Sweechbridge Road and May Street.

“The site is located within the countryside, outside the urban boundary of Herne Bay. It is not in an isolated location, as there are commercial uses and residential properties nearby, along with the Taylor Wimpey residential development (Hillborough Site) to the west which is under construction and is edging its way eastward in phases towards the application site.”

“The site’s principal access is from Sweechbridge Road on the western boundary, which once inside the site its alignment dog legs in a southward direction towards the location of the former buildings. A secondary access is located along the southern boundary. This leads onto a secondary road that has parking bays (former points of access into the land), the entry slip road onto the Thanet Way (going in an easterly direction) and also serves some properties to the east.”

Officer report

Planning history

There was no relevant planning history, and screening concluded that an environmental impact assessment was not required.

“As part of this application, an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Screening opinion has been carried out. This concluded that the development is not EIA development and so an EIA is not required.”

Officer report

What officers recommended

Officers recommended approval because the employment development would help meet evidenced floorspace needs, with harms considered limited or capable of mitigation by conditions.

“These figures comprise clear evidenced need for new employment development in the district. The Council is therefore in the position whereby the presumption in favour of sustainable development (as set out under SP1 of the current Local Plan and Paragraph 11(d) of the NPPF) applies. 23.”

“As such, and in part as a result of needing to find additional employment sites to meet the need for growth, the draft Local Plan policy HB6 allocates the application site for employment development. The development mix is set out in the wording of the Policy as approximately 9,800 sq m of business or employment floorspace (with a limited amount of alternative compatible uses being appropriate where this supports the main business/employment use).”

Officer report

What consultees said

Consultees generally raised no objection, subject to conditions covering matters including air quality, construction, drainage, ecology, archaeology and highways.

“Environment Agency - No objection, subject to safeguarding conditions being imposed covering land contamination and drainage. As surface water is proposed to be discharged to watercourses and not to the ground, no objections are raised.”

“KCC Archaeology - No objections subject to conditions. The immediate area is rich in archaeological remains and has been the focus of several investigations, including those from the nearby Hillborough Site, under construction.”

Officer report

What residents said

Twenty representations objected on countryside, ecology, pollution, highways, living conditions, landscaping, security, flooding and policy grounds, while seven supported the application.

“A site notice was displayed in the vicinity of the application site and an advert was placed in the local newspaper. Letters were sent to neighbouring occupiers, to which 25 representations were received, 20 objecting to the application on the following grounds:”

“Impact upon countryside, unsustainable location; • Loss of wildlife, harm to protected species, ecology and biodiversity; • Noise/disturbance and other pollution; • Harm to highway safety; • Overlooking, loss of privacy, overshadowing - harm to living conditions and well being; • Out of scale, harm to visual amenity, lack of suitable landscaping, loss of trees; • The uses are incompatible with the adjacent residential properties; • Operating times will harm residential…”

Officer report

Who spoke

An objector and the applicant spoke during consideration of the application.

The committee vote

The proposal was agreed, with six members voting for it, four against and one abstention.

“A proposal was put that planning permission be GRANTED for the development described in the above application with an amendment to Condition 22 to include reference to the site layout having been amended since the original flood risk assessment and drainage strategy was prepared, an amendment to Condition 37 to correct the error in the opening hours permitted, and an informative that construction vehicles should not enter the Thanet Way in the Whitstable direction due to the…”

“When put to a vote, the proposal was AGREED.”

Minutes