Food store at Land at SX 612 953 Stockley

What was proposed

The application sought a food store with parking, landscaping, drainage and servicing, including 121 spaces, a delivery bay and a new Exeter Road access.

“The application seeks full planning permission for the construction of a retail food store (Use Class E) with associated parking, landscaping, drainage and servicing. The application has been subject to a number of revisions to address technical concerns raised by consultees and has been subject to re-consultation. As amended the proposal comprises: -”

Officer report

The site

The 1.12-hectare site lies east of Okehampton beside Exeter Road, opposite the A30 eastbound off-slip, with homes, fields and a garden centre nearby.

“This 1.12ha site is located c. 2.15km to the east of Okehampton, on Exeter Road, opposite the eastbound off-slip of the A30 Okehampton Bypass, which forms the closest section of the Strategic Road Network (SRN), which is to the south and provides the main arterial route to Exeter and Cornwall. The site is bordered by detached 2 storey dwellings to the west (with bungalows further to the west), open…”

“The existing highway verge adjacent to the Exeter Road (B3260) to the front of the site contains a memorial bench set on a slab base. There are bus stops on Exeter Road adjacent to the proposed site and the Okehampton Interchange Railway station (currently under construction and due to open summer 2026) is c.600m walking distance to the northwest, off Higher Stockley Mead Road.”

Officer report

Why officers recommended refusal

Officers found inadequate retail evidence, habitat loss, unresolved road safety and drainage issues, and landscape harm that outweighed the scheme’s benefits.

“Whilst the council’s landscape officer accepts the impacts of developing the site could be mitigated, in the absence of justification for the development of the site it is not considered that the inevitable harm from turning in undeveloped site into a developed site in this prominent and elevated location would be outweighed by any benefit arising from the development.”

“Set against this is the significant harm that the proposed store would have on the vitality and viability of the town centre and the very significant harm that would arise from the loss of the lowland meadow habitat and the unquantified harm to highways safety and the risk of increase flooding elsewhere…”

Officer report

What consultees said

National Highways, drainage and ecology consultees raised objections, while the local highway authority, landscape officer, Natural England and tree officer raised no objection subject to matters identified.

“DCC Highways – no objection to the proposal as amended subject to conditions to provide for: - 1. Construction management plan prior to commencement 2. The prevention of surface water discharging onto the public highway…”

“OFFICER NOTE: - A holding objection would normally require the LPA to notify National Highways (NH) that they intend to determine the application contrary to the objection. This affords NH the opportunity to require the matter to be referred to the Secretary of State prior to determination. At the time of writing revised details remained under consideration by National Highways and an oral update will be necessary in respect of any change in their position…”

Officer report

What residents said

About 250 letters supported the scheme and about 55 objected, with views covering congestion, jobs, access, town-centre effects, biodiversity, landscape and drainage.

“Policy non-compliance (Sequential Test, NPPF town centre policies) • Traffic safety risks at the A30 junction • Significant biodiversity loss (>85%), including confirmed protected bat roost within 5m • Impact on Dartmoor National Park (lighting/visibility) • Impact on town centre vitality (loss of linked trips, trade diversion) • Availability of alternative brownfield sites (North Road) • Drainage / aquifer concerns in Critical Drainage Area…”

“Severe congestion caused by three supermarkets clustered in the town centre • Need for infrastructure matching large-scale housing growth (esp. east Okehampton) • Improved shopping access for hamlets and new estates…”

Officer report

Who spoke

The agent supported the application, the parish council representative opposed it, and local ward members gave differing views on conditional approval and policy concerns.

What members debated

Members discussed the ecological site, National Highways’ access concerns, the need for facilities in eastern Okehampton and the town centre’s viability.

“(c) the need for facilities in this location. Whilst the policy constraints were such that it made granting this planning application very difficult, the need for facilities in the expanding Eastern area of Okehampton was nonetheless recognised;”

“(d) the potential viability impact on the town centre. A Member advised that he had viewed each of the letters in support of granting this application and a number had made the point that the construction of an out of town retail store in this area would prevent them having to visit the town centre. In expanding on the point, the Member emphasised that it was a…”

Minutes

The vote

The motion to refuse the application was proposed, seconded and carried.

“After the debate, it was then PROPOSED and SECONDED and, when put to the vote, declared CARRIED that:”

“The planning application be refused (as per the Planning Officer’s published report and recommendations), subject to refusal reason 1 also referencing Policy SPT6 and refusal reasons 2, 3, 4 and 5 each being amended to reference that they were each contrary to the National Planning Policy Framework.”

Minutes