Agenda Document for Planning Committee, 06/03/2017
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Item 4 REPORT TO: Planning Committee REPORT NO. HEP/15/17 th DATE: 6 March 2017 REPORTING OFFICER: Head of Environment and Planning CONTACT OFFICER: David Williams (Ext 8775) SUBJECT: Development Control Applications WARD: N/A PURPOSE OF THE REPORT To determine the listed planning applications. INFORMATION Detailed reports on each application together with the recommendations are attached. RECOMMENDATION See attached reports. BACKGROUND PAPERS None. Page 13 REPORT OF THE HEAD OF ENVIRONMENT AND PLANNING – 6 MARCH 2017 Community Code No Applicant Recommendation Pages RHO P/2015 /0770 MR WILLIAM LUKE BITHELL GRANT 16 – 19 GWE P/2016 /0189 WELSH TOWN PLANNING AND REFUSE 20 – 40 HOUSING TRUST AND CONTIGUOUS LANDOWNER CEF P/2016 /0505 PROSPECT ESTATES LTD GRANT 41 – 52 MR R COOKE SES P/2016 /0953 ROBINWOOD ACTIVITY CENTRE GRANT 53 – 63 LTD ESC P/2016 /0968 MR ROBERT THATCHER GRANT 64 – 66 CEF P/2016 /0992 MR & MRS DUDLEY REFUSE 67 – 72 LLR P/2016 /1012 MR PAUL BIGNELL REFUSE 73 – 77 GRE P/2016 /1032 BRESFORD ADAMS GRANT 78 – 82 COMMERCIAL MR J RICE-JONES CEF P/2016 /1127 BAYNON PROPERTY SERVICES REFUSE 83 – 86 MR DAVID METCALFE CEF P/2016 /1128 BAYNON PROPERTY SERVICES REFUSE 87 – 90 MR DAVID METCALFE ISY P/2016 /1145 J R WEBSTERS AND CO LTD GRANT 91 – 95 WRR P/2016 /1146 UNISTAY (WALNUT TREE) LTD GRANT 96 – 100 MR PETER BYRON MIN P/2017 /0038 W D STANT LTD GRANT 101 – 108 MR JOHN HAUGHTON RHO P/2017 /0045 MR LIAM JONES GRANT 109 – 112 WRO P/2017 /0046 MR AJITH KARTHA GRANT 113 – 116 OVE P/2017 /0050 SDG TRAINING LTD GRANT 117 – 119 MR D GRIFFITHS ROS P/2017 /0057 MR & MRS E & V FRULLONI & GRANT 120 – 127 PIERMARINI CEF P/2017 /0062 BENNETT VERBY GRANT 128 – 131 MR KEVIN MCCAY HOL P/2017 /0086 MR ADRIAN GREEN REFUSE 132 – 134 Total Number of Applications Included in Report – 19 Page 14 REPORT OF THE HEAD OF ENVIRONMENT AND PLANNING – 6 MARCH 2017 All plans included in this report are re-produced from Ordnance Survey Mapping with the permission of the Controller of Her Majesty’s Stationery Office. Crown Copyright. Unauthorised reproduction infringes Crown Copyright and may lead to prosecution or civil proceedings. WCBC Licence No. LA0902IL All plans are intended to be illustrative only and should be used only to identify the location of the proposal and the surrounding features. The scale of the plans will vary. Full details may be viewed on the case files. Page 15 REPORT OF THE HEAD OF ENVIRONMENT AND PLANNING – 6 MARCH 2017 APPLICATION NO: LOCATION: DATE RECEIVED: P/2015 /0770 UNIT 8 2 COPPI INDUSTRIAL 12/10/2015 ESTATE HALL LANE RHOSLLANNERCHRUGOG COMMUNITY: WREXHAM CASE OFFICER: Rhos LL14 1TG PF DESCRIPTION: WARD: CHANGE OF USE OF PREVIOUS AGENT NAME: Ponciau INDUSTRIAL UNIT TO GYM AND MR WILLIAM LUKE FITNESS STUDIO (USE CLASS D2) BITHELL (IN RETROSPECT) APPLICANT(S) NAME: MR WILLIAM LUKE BITHELL ______________________________________________________________ THE SITE SITE PROPOSAL Planning permission is sought in retrospect for the change of use of a former industrial unit (B1/B8) to a gym and fitness studio (D2). Page 16 REPORT OF THE HEAD OF ENVIRONMENT AND PLANNING – 6 MARCH 2017 HISTORY CB00853 Extensions to rear of existing workshops. Granted 04.02.1997 CB01868 Extension to industrial unit. Granted 06.04.1998 P/2006/0116 Construction of new vehicular access and alteration to existing access. Granted 27.03.2006 DEVELOPMENT PLAN The site is located within a defined settlement limit. Policies PS2, GDP1 and T8 are relevant. Guidance is also contained in Local Planning Guidance Notes 16 – Parking Standards. CONSULTATIONS Community Council: - Concerns were raised regarding parking on Hall Lane. Members were in support of the premises and usage but issues relating to identified parking are required. - There is a side gate, which upon approach of the applicant has been closed for a period of time and this made a difference but has since re-opened escalating the issue. - There is sufficient parking on the Coppi Industrial Estate, therefore there is a requirement for identified parking areas to be used. Hall Lane leads to an industrial area and has many large vehicles and agricultural vehicles, there is also a school in the direct vicinity. Local Members: Notified 16.10.2015 Site notice: Expired 14.12.2015 Highways: No recommendations. Public Protection: Recommends noise/amplified music control condition. Neighbouring occupiers: Four neighbouring occupiers notified. SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS: Amenity: The proposal to change the use of the building from an industrial use to an assembly and leisure use is acceptable in principle. The site is an established industrial estate; however there are no policy objections to the loss of industrial provision in this locality. The main issue to consider is the impact of the development upon the amenity of the neighbouring occupiers by way of noise and highway safety. Public Protection have not objected to the proposed development but have recommended a condition to control potential noise disturbance from amplified music given the nature of activities in such a use class. The nearest noise Page 17 REPORT OF THE HEAD OF ENVIRONMENT AND PLANNING – 6 MARCH 2017 sensitive properties are located some 35 metres to the north of the site along Hall Street. I consider that this condition is reasonable and would allow for noise attenuation measures to be employed if such a nuisance were deemed evident. Highways: I am aware of concerns raised by the Community Council regarding the presence of parked vehicles along Hall Street in the vicinity of the boundary of the application site. Photographic evidence has been provided showing parked vehicles in the evening time. There are no Traffic Regulation Orders in situ in this location to prevent motorists parking vehicles on the highway and I have no evidence to suggest that those vehicles are solely using to the proposed development. There are residential properties fronting on to Hall Street which may contribute to the parked vehicles. However, I have raised this matter with the applicant and it has been acknowledged. Measures have been employed to attempt to reduce the reliance on vehicles parking on the highway. There is off street parking provision associated with the building, and given the relatively small area of the entire building assigned for the proposed use and the likely times of the day where there would be a peak demand for the use I am satisfied that the site can adequately cater for off road parking provision in accordance with LPG16. Any temptation for customers to park on the adjoining highway (albeit legal) is as a result of a pedestrian gateway which leads from the site on to Hall Street. The applicant has confirmed that when this gate is closed, there appears to be a marked reduction in on street parking, which would appear to correlate with the Community Council’s comments. I would not wish to insist that this gate be closed at all times as it would preclude access to the rest of the site by pedestrians without the need to walk a further distance. Given that highways have not objected to the proposal and that there are no parking restrictions in this location I do not consider that there are sufficient grounds to refuse planning permission in this instance. However, I intend to impose a planning condition requiring the submission of a parking and pedestrian management plan for further approval. I would anticipate that this plan could include but not be limited to measures to encourage customers to utilise the off street parking provision through notices within the building, advice when joining the facility and the use of social media to promote the off street parking provision. It would also aim to ensure that the gate is closed at times when the adjoining commercial uses are not in operation. I consider that these methods would allow for the users of the site to be made aware of the potential problems associated with on road parking. Conclusion: With the introduction of measures to promote the existence of off street parking facilities and measures to prevent pedestrian access from Hall Street at peak times I consider the development can be considered acceptable. This is reflected in my recommendation. Page 18 REPORT OF THE HEAD OF ENVIRONMENT AND PLANNING – 6 MARCH 2017 RECOMMENDATION: That permission be GRANTED CONDITION(S) 1. Within one month of the date of this permission a parking and pedestrian management plan to the shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The measures as approved as part of this plan shall be implemented in accordance with a timescale to be approved as part of the scheme and maintained thereafter. 2. The A-weighted equivalent continuous noise level (LAeq) emanating from the site, as measured 1 metre from any facade of any noise sensitive premises over any 5 minute period with amplified music taking place shall not increase by more than 3dB when compared to a similar measurement, from the same position, and over a comparable period, with no amplified music taking place. The unweighted equivalent noise level (Leq) in the 63Hz Octave band, measured using the 'fast' time constant, inside any living room of any noise sensitive premises, with the windows open or closed, over any 5 minute period with amplified music taking place, shall show no increase when compared to a similar measurement, from the same location(s), and over a comparable period, with no amplified music taking place. No sound emanating from the establishment shall be audible within any noise sensitive premises between 23.00 and 07.00 hours.