Sainsbury’s Planning Application Update

You will recall that on Wednesday the Planning committee were to again consider this application after they had visited the site last week to see the traffic conditions and site layout.
Adrian, Jayne and Eleanor made further verbal representations to the other 8 committee members as to why they thought that the proposal should be rejected. There then followed a 40 minute discussion which in the main related to the traffic conditions surrounding the site and in particular the access and egress problems which would be exacerbated if the development went ahead. As the highway officers of the council had indicated that they were happy with the present proposals including the requirements they had made for the provision of a new zebra crossing, and a new C.C.T.V. installation for keeping a check on any traffic problems at the junction of Heol Llanishen Fach and Thornhill Road some members said that they were in a difficult position to not allow the development to go ahead. However some members thought that before making the final decision they would like to see whether the highway officers and the developers could meet to reconsider the proposed layout and particularly the in and out access arrangements to see if any improvements could be made. A vote was then taken and it was unanimous that the application should be deferred until any further amendments could be given to them for further consideration. This was an unusual outcome and I am sure that this was 1. as a result of what the members saw last week, 2, the large number of residents who have voiced their opposition, and 3, the eloquent speeches made by all the local councillors from Rhiwbina and Llanishen. It could well be that the developer will come back and want the Council to make a final decision based on the plans before them now. At the meeting the Principal Planning Officer did try and advise the members that they should indeed make a decision on the present plans before them. One important factor Adrian mentioned to the committee was that although Sainsburys were refered to in the application it is the developer (PMG Ltd.) who is making the application and there is no guarantee that ultimately no other supermarket group or other party comes forward with a similar or alternative proposal for the site. Indeed when I was going round speaking to the occupiers of the Thornhill Court flats opposite some said that they would prefer a supermarket than another block of flats.

Information from CFFOURTEEN