I do have a lot of sympathy for Stafford BC's planning department and SCC's Highways Department because they are sometimes unfairly criticised by people that do not understand the planning system. SBC Planners must determine planning applications in accordance with national and local planning policy unless material considerations indicate otherwise. At the national level, we have the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) (worth a read). This is a pro-growth document and has a presumption in favour of development. The premise being that 'Developments should be approved unless the negatives outweigh the benefits'. The benefits being an additional 20, 30, 40 jobs (??).
In my opinion there are 3 potential negatives with the proposal; traffic, noise and light pollution. In terms of traffic, the NPPF sets out that 'developments should only be refused on highways grounds if the impacts of the development will be
severe'. As such, the Highways Department are not always able to object to schemes even if they might want too. The very fact that the proposed McDonalds may add a couple of additional cars on the road network and increase queues at the traffic lights by a couple of minutes does not constitute (imo) a severe impact (please note I am not a transport consultant, however I do speak from experience).
In terms of light pollution, the planners can refuse (and I hope they do) the neon light because of its impact on the residential amenity of those living at the Crossings. They can also insist that any lighting minimises light spillage.
Noise - The proposed scheme will increase noise, especially at non sociable hours (6am - midnight) depending upon the permitted opening hours. However, will the increase in noise levels (of its normal use) impact on neighbouring residential amenity. In order to assess the noise impact, the planners will insist that a noise assessment is carried out. The noise assessment will measure existing noise levels and predict the potential increase in noise levels as a result of this development. In order to do this, they will measure the noise levels at other McDonalds drive thrus. If the noise levels are deemed to be significant at the nearest noise sensitive location (nearest residential property), the Environmental Health Officer will insist on noise mitigation measures or object to the scheme. The application could be refused on noise grounds, however I doubt it will be because I do not think the noise levels at the nearest residential property will be significant to justify a refusal reason.
in light of the above SBC and SCC have a very difficult job to try and refuse this scheme even if they wanted too.
It may sound from the above that I am in favour of this application, I am not. I hope this application is refused. However, my reasons for wanting this application refused are based on non planning reasons and therefore they cannot be used by the planning dept to refuse the scheme. I want the scheme refused because it will attract inconsiderate, lazy chavs that think it is acceptable to dispose of their litter on the floor and to play their music at full blast at unsociable hours, however sadly there is not a planning policy in the local plan, which states ‘applications should be refused if it will attract stupid, lazy chavs’. If there was the planners / objectors could rely on this policy to refuse the scheme.
In order to get this scheme refused, I would urge the objectors to do the following:-
- Lobby your local ward councillor;
- Set up a petition;
- Write letters of objection that quote planning reasons (see above) as to why the scheme should be refused;
- Look at the planning consents that have been approved for the retail park and KFC. Did the consent for the retail park restrict the number of A5 uses (drive thrus / restaurants). If it did, quote it in your objection letter. Read the committee report for the KFC application who objected to the application? Why did they object? Did the planner raise any concerns about the application? What planning policies did they quote (Quote these policies back in your letter)? If the planning dept had concerns about 1 drive thru, surely these concerns should be doubled by permitting another drive thru.
- Visit the other drive thru in Stafford. Take photographs. What issues does this drive thru have? State these in your letter of objection and provide proof if you can.
Before I get accused of it, I do not work for SBC or SCC, however I do have significant experience of the planning and property profession. If the objectors want any more advice PM me.
