Issue - meetings

Description of application - Full planning permission for the demolition of the existing public house and erection of an A1 retail food store, with associated car parking, reconfigured site access, landscaping, servicing and

other associated works.

Oral representations from the applicant included reference to carbon emissions, highways issues, road safety, the realignment of pavements and marketing of the site.

The applicant and his colleagues from SCP and Walsingham Planning gave the following responses to Member questions:-

·  On average, two deliveries per day would be made using 16½ tonne vehicles.  The use of smaller vehicles would result in more deliveries being made.  A permit would be required during restricted hours.

·  Hours of operation were 8am – 9pm (Monday-Saturday) and 10am – 4 pm (Sunday).

·  The site had been marketed since 2013 and had been constantly marketed from the time the application had been drawn up.

·  The kitchen was removed by the previous occupiers when they vacated the site.

·  The lighting column on the north side would be relocated north towards the crossing point and positioned 2.8m from the nearest residential property and less than 30m from the next column.

·  The northern side of the pavement would be widened to 3.3m.

·  In accordance with the London Plan, 14 electric car charging spaces would be provided consisting of 7 active and 7 passive. If required, a rapid charger could be provided alongside the proposed fast chargers.

·  In regard to solar power, a wide variety of measures had been included in the design.

·  A 40% reduction in emissions re. transport had already been achieved and the applicant was aiming to reduce this by a further 20%.

·  The applicant was willing to discuss the signing of a Legal Agreement not to vary the hours of delivery for a reasonable number of years).

·  A total of 40 people would be employed, some part-time and some full-time, working staggered shifts during trading hours.

Oral representations in objection to the application were received from visiting Ward Member Councillor David Cartwright who reported the following:-

·  Road safety issues posed an unacceptable risk to the public and local community.

·  Ward Member views were based on personal knowledge of the area, gained over many years.

·  Not replacing the existing streetlamp at the pedestrian crossing (as stated in para. 2 on page 14 of the report), would result in a lower level of safety.

·  The accident statistics reported at para. 9.67, page 45 were disputed.  On average, there were at least 12 road accidents per year.

·  Paras. 69-71 (page 46), referred to sightlines.  The site was located alongside a very busy road where pavement widths were the minimal 2m measurement and  Greenwich Council had objected strongly on this issue.

·  There were also environmental issues including inadequate social distancing measures.

·  Traffic levels were 30% less at the moment due to Covid-19 restrictions.

·  The Council was under pressure to provide new homes and this site would be ideal for such provision.

·  Some smaller local shops would close and move away if the application was  ...  view the full minutes text for item 44