Here’s the end of the report on the Asda delivery hours application:
4.27 The retail store was originally allowed on appeal under application reference 05/01049/REM. The store was modified by a further application to amend details to the building allowed on appeal. In the consideration of the issues concerning the provision of the store the Inspector allowed the building, subject to the specific condition limiting the delivery of goods to between 0700 hours and 2300 hours.
4.28 The applicants state that the extra hour in the morning would allow for an extra one or two deliveries. The store currently opens between 7.30am – 10pm Monday to Saturday and 10am to 4 pm on Sundays and that the restrictions in place hamper the re- stocking of the store, causing a problem in the supply of fresh goods. The applicants state the variation of the condition would reduce current problems of HGVs currently waiting at the gates in the mornings.
4.29 The Council’s Head of Environmental Services disagrees with the findings of the Delivery Noise Assessment and takes the view that the arrivals and departures will result in an unacceptable increase in noise to those residents adjoining the site fronting Priory Chase. The application should therefore be refused and the existing condition allowed to stand.
RECOMMENDATION 4.30 It is proposed that this Committee RESOLVES to REFUSE the application for the following reason:
-1 The proposed variation in hours to allow deliveries by service vehicles from 0600 hours would by way of the noise levels created by the delivery vehicles during their entry in to/exit of the delivery yard, have a significant adverse effect upon nearby residential premises. A level of 73dBLAF,max or lower must be achieved at the outside of a closed bedroom window in order to attain a reasonable internal night-time level.
The Delivery Noise Assessment submitted in support of the application indicates that this cannot be achieved at the façades of nearby closed bedroom windows. Therefore, a reasonable internal noise environment is not attainable, and certainly not during warmer weather when bedroom windows may reasonably be expected to be open.
The proposal would therefore prove detrimental to the amenity that ought reasonably be expected to be enjoyed by residents in Priory Chase adjoining the site contrary to parts (iii) and (iv) to Policy PN5 to the Rochford District Replacement Local Plan (2006).