Retail unit at Sandys Hill Lane, Frome

What was proposed

The application sought reserved matters approval for one retail unit with associated landscaping, parking, servicing and access arrangements.

“Application Details Application reference numbers 2024/0428/REM Application type Reserved Matters Extension of Time Agreed Description Application for approval of reserved matters following outline approval 2019/1671/OTS pursuant to condition 4, comprising the erection of 1 retail unit (Phase 2) with associated landscaping, parking and servicing arrangements.”

“Proposed development and background to the application 4.1 This application seeks Reserved Matters approval relating to the appearance, landscaping, layout and scale for the development of 1no.retail unit on an undeveloped parcel of land immediately to the south-east of the Sainsbury’s supermarket in Frome.”

Officer report

The site and surroundings

The Phase 2 site lies beside existing retail uses, open countryside and housing, and is accessed from Sandys Hill Lane.

“Following approval of Reserved Matters application 2024/0350/REM for Phase 1 of the wider site, development has commenced with works carried out to create the approved access and to reprofile the wider site. The wider site previously rose in elevation from the road towards the south-west (the ‘rear’ of the site).”

“In addition to the access and reprofiling, erection of the Phase 1 retail unit has commenced to the ‘front’/north-east of the site. The site is accessed from Sandys Hill Lane to the north-east. This access was approved as part of the outline planning consent. This application now considers the proposed Phase 2 development of the site consisting of a parcel of land located to the ‘rear’ (south-west) of the site.”

Officer report

What consultees said

Town and parish councils, a councillor and the civic society raised concerns about traffic, deliveries, landscaping, design, noise and sustainability, while statutory officers raised no objection.

“Statutory Consultee Comments Frome Town Council Commented 01.11.2024 – Objection on grounds of: • Traffic/Highways - unsafe car park layout shared with HGVs • Residential amenity - delivery hours should be conditioned with no nighttime deliveries to protect adjoining residential properties. • Design – elevations/materials in a prominent location. • Sustainability - no solar panels on the roof. • Design - soft landscaping.”

“Divisional Member Councillor Kay, Frome East Division Commented 14.10.2024 (following re-consultation on both 2024/0350/REM and 2024/0428/REM) but prior to consideration by the Planning Committee – East: ‘I still have some concerns about these 2 applications. For example, I still have reservations about the access route for HGVs and delivery vehicles. And the 2 apps do not marry up on a few issues like the landscaping going across the whole southern boundary.”

Officer report

What residents said

Residents objected over highways, landscaping, amenity, flood risk, the need for another large retail unit and the site’s greenfield location.

“Objection on grounds of: • The original planning permission has expired and a start on the work within the stated period was a clear condition. • Design of the development and landscape impact • Impact on River Frome valley flood risk • Insufficient landscaping/tree planting • Residential amenity • Additional store of this nature not needed in the town…”

“Objection on grounds of: • Additional large retail unit not required at this ‘greenfield’ location…”

Officer report

Who spoke

A parish council representative and the divisional councillor raised concerns, while the planning agent supported approval and highlighted employment and technical assessments.

What members discussed

Members discussed delivery conflicts, congestion, trees, hedgerows, rights of way, landscaping and the absence of statutory consultee objections.

“Members discussed HGV delivery arrangements and potential conflicts between delivery vehicles and customers. • Questions were raised regarding traffic congestion associated with the wider development. • Officers confirmed that the delivery arrangements had already been assessed through previous permissions. • Clarification was provided that there were no public rights of way crossing the site. • Members discussed protection of existing trees and hedgerows.”

“Confirmed delivery arrangements had previously been assessed and accepted by Highway Officers. Explained that HGV movements were expected to be limited in number. Confirmed that servicing arrangements had been found acceptable through previous planning permissions. Advised that no public rights of way crossed the site. Confirmed that protection measures for hedgerows and trees formed part of approved construction management arrangements. 7.”

Minutes

The committee vote

The motion to approve was carried with six votes in favour, no votes against and five abstentions.

“At the conclusion of the debate, Councillor Simon Carswell proposed that the application be approved in accordance with the Officer’s recommendation. This proposal was seconded by Councillor Martin Lovell.”

“On being put to the vote the proposal to approve was carried with 6 votes in favour, 0 votes against and 5 abstentions.”

Minutes

The decision

Planning application 2024/0428/REM was approved in accordance with the officer recommendation.

“That planning application 2024/0428/REM be APPROVED in accordance with the Officer’s recommendation.”

Minutes