Planning Policies

In 2012 the minutes of the Lee Green Assembly stated that ‘some of the issues include the ways the proposed development goes against quite a number of the Council’s planning guidelines for district centres. One of the main issues relates to the size and scope of the superstore which it is envisaged would impact upon traders in the smaller shops and the open spaces currently at the centre’

The 2014 plans offer less public space and fewer small retailers than the 2012 plans did.

Other planning policies relating to pollution, consultation and sustainability also do not appear to be reflected in St Modwen’s plans.

Summary of planning policies:

Detailed Planning Policies

 

Councils Upholding Planning Policies:

  • 2013-2014 14 councils (some in London) and Eric Pickles turned down plans for supermarkets on pollution and congestion grounds (7 against planning officer’s advice)
  • 2013 Planning Inspector John Gray: “… the fact that the junction is already operating above its capacity is not an adequate reason for adding more traffic to it’ (Holmefirth, Kirklees)
  • 2014, on appeal, plans turned down because alternative plans not adequately considered (Ballycastle, Co Antrim)
  • 2013, Hillingdon and Kent turned down mixed use developments on overdevelopment grounds (Ickenham and Westgate on Sea).
  • 2007, Kirkleas turned down a second supermarket in a small area on lack of diversity (Cleckheaton)
  • Surrey conducted its own assessements rather than let the developer do them
  • 2014 Oxford, as a condition of grant and maintenance of planning permission demanded continual pollution monitoring: (Westgate Centre redevelopment)
  • 2013 Henley refused café permission for outdoor seating where pollution levels were over legal limits
  • 2014 Bromley allowed change in town centre use from retail to leisure (Government figures – 20% too much Retail on High Streets) (current town centre development)
  • Southwark stuck firm to planning policies , leading to sale of Elephant and Castle to a developer who would develop more appropriately