Application No: N/06/01086/FUL

Date Registered: 23rd June 2006

Applicant: Frank Cogan & Martin MacKay Clo Mono Consultants Limited 48 St Vincent Street G2 5TS

Agent Mono Consultants Limited 48 St Vincent Street Glasgow G2 5TS

Development: Use of Yard as a Beer Garden

Location: Stewart Inn Road Cardowan Glasgow G33 6AA

Ward: 70 Stepps Councillor Brian Wallace

Grid Reference: 266350668337

File Reference: N/06/01 086/FU L

Site History:

Development Plan: The site is covered by Policy HG3: Retention of Residential Amenity of the Northern Corridor Local Plan 2005

Contrary to Development Plan: No

Consultations:

Representations: 3 letters received

Newspaper Advertisement: Advertised 1gth July 2006

Recommendation: Grant Subject to the Following Conditions:-

1. That this development is hereby permitted for a temporary period and shall expire on 31st October 2008.

Reason: To allow the Planning Authority to retain effective control and assess the impact of the development over the temporary permitted period. A Background Papers:

Application form and plans received 23rd June 2006 Letter and amended plans from Mono Consultants received 4'h August 2006

Memo from Traffic and Transportation Team Leader received 4th July 2006 Memo from Head Of Protective Services received 4th July 2006

Letter from Grant Reilly & Gillian Graham, 3 Brown Court, Stepps, G33 6FD received 30th June 2006. Letter from Mr Thomas Cole, 1 Garnkirk Lane, Stepps, Glasgow, G33 6BD received 31st July 2006. Letter from Mr Terence Cole, 3 Garnkirk Lane, Stepps, Glasgow, G33 6BD received 31st July 2006.

Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact Mrs Kirsten Devlin at 01236 616463.

16'h August 2006 APPLICATION NO. N/06/01086/FUL

REPORT

1. Description of Site and Proposal

1.1 This application is for the use of a yard as a beer garden at the Stewart Inn, Cardowan Road, Stepps. The proposal includes the erection of a perimeter fence with a double inward opening gate for delivery access and a wheelchair access ramp. Internal and external alterations are proposed in order that there is direct access to the beer garden via the public bar.

1.2 The public house is located within a mixed-use area. Immediately north west of the site lies Stepps Fire Station. It is bounded to the south by Garnkirk Lane, which is privately maintained. Further south, approximately 30 metres away are the recently constructed residential properties at Brown Court. Directly west of the pub is Cardowan Social Club. At the entrance to Garnkirk Lane is the Village Shop, and approximately 55 metres along Garnkirk Lane is a car repair workshop, with a number of residential properties sited further along the lane.

2. Development Plan

2.1 This proposal raises no strategic issues in terms of the Glasgow and the Clyde Valley Joint Structure Plan 2000 and therefore requires to be assessed in terms of relevant Local Plan policies.

2.2 In terms of the Northern Corridor Local Plan 2005 the site is covered by Policy HG3: Retention of Residential amenity. The policy states “...the Council will seek to enhance the established character of existing and new housing areas by opposing development which is incompatible

with a residential setting or adversely affects the amenity of established housing areas.. .’I.

2.3 The use of the yard as a beer garden is considered to be a bad neighbour development and the proposal has been advertised as such in the local press.

3. Consultations and Representations

3.1 My Traffic and Transportation Section has no objection to the proposal subject to some minor alterations relating to the location of the fence and the inward opening gate, which the applicant has already agreed to.

3.2 My Protective Services Section has commented that the beer garden could give rise to noise complaints from neighbouring residential properties. No amplified music shall be emitted from, or located within the beer garden.

3.3 3 letters of representation have been received in connection with the proposal. One local resident has requested the Planning and Environment Committee visits the site prior to determining the application. The main points of objections and my comments thereon are as follows:

+ There is concern that if approved, the proposal will result in noise disturbance.

Comment: Whilst the nearest residential property is some 30 metres or so from the site, it has to be considered that the proposal may give rise to an increase in noise levels. The fact the public house is located within a mixed-use area and has been in existence a number a years before the introduction of nearby residential development is also a consideration. As stated in paragraph 3.2 above, no amplified music shall be emitted from or located within the beer garden. As there is concern over the potential for noise nuisance, the applicant has agreed, if approved, to a temporary consent in order that the Department can fully ssess the impact of the development on adjacent residential properties.

+ The proposal involves the removal of a mature Sycamore tree. The tree is the most mature in the immediate vicinity, and if retained it may assist in diffusing noise generated from the beer garden.

Comment: The applicant has confirmed the tree requires to be removed to allow the erection of the fence and access gates. Unfortunately, as the tree is not protected, the owners are able to remove it at any time without the Council’s consent.

+ If the tree is removed then alternative planting should be provided on the Council owned land between the application site and the residential development at Brown Court.

Comment: The land referred to is outwith the application site. Should the applicant decide to provide planting it is a matter for negotiation with the Council’s Department of Community Services.

+ The proposal will lead to a reduction in available car parking spaces, with the spaces behind the Village Store being shared with the public house. There are already visibility issues at the entrance to Garnkirk Lane caused by inconsiderate car users, particularly at peak times.

Comment: It is agreed the proposal will result in a reduction in available parking spaces, however, my Traffic and Transportation Section have not raised any concerns in this respect. As Garnkirk Lane is a privately maintained substandard road, located within a mixed use area, it is understandable that at peak times users can experience difficulties.

+ The proposed fence located directly on Garnkirk Lane will cause obstruction of the lane by delivery vehicles, which normally park on the boundary or reverse into the yard. At times residents of Garnkirk Lane have been obstructed by delivery vehicles that do not move until they are completely unloaded. The fence should be a minimum of 2 metres back.

Comment: The proposal has been amended in order to site the fence 2 metres back as my Traffic and Transportation Team were concerned about vehicle and pedestrian visibility. An inward opening gate is also proposed to allow vehicles to reverse into the beer garden in order to unload.

+ Bin storage also requires to be taken into consideration, as on refuse days they are moved to the boundary line, thus they would obstruct the lane.

Comment: As the fence has been set back 2 metres, bins can be placed outwith the site without blocking the lane on collection days.

+ The proposed wheelchair access ramp could be repositioned to face Cardowan Road, thus leaving a small area for parking if the fence line is set back in line with the public house.

Comment: Although the footpath is privately owned, the Council would not wish to encourage the parking of vehicles over any footpath.

+ The yard is described as disused, whereas it is currently used for bin and barrel storage, parking and service access.

Comment: The planning application does not state the yard is disused, and it is agreed it is currently used for the above purposes. + The timber boundary fence will not allow HGV service vehicles to access the site. HGvs currently cause problems by blocking Garnkirk Lane and the proposal will exacerbate the situation.

Comment: The double inward opening gate will allow service vehicles to reverse into the site and exit in forward gear. Furthermore, my Traffic and Transportation Section have no concerns in relation to vehicular deliveries.

+ There is concern that waste from the public house will be stored outwith the site.

Comment: All waste will be stored internally and would only be placed outwith the fence (but still on land in their ownership) on refuse collection days.

4. Plannina Assessment and Conclusions

4.1 In accordance with Section 25 of the Town and Country Planning () Act 1997, planning decisions must be made in accordance with the development plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise. In this case the proposal raises no strategic issues so the proposal must be assessed against the adopted Northern Corridor Local Plan 2005. Policy HG3 makes it clear that the Council opposes development that is incompatible with a residential setting or adversely affects the amenity of established housing areas. As previously stated, the public house is within a mixed-use area, and has been in existence a number of years before the establishment of the nearby residential development at Brown Court.

4.2 The applicant has confirmed they intend to enforce a closing time of 10 p.m. in the beer garden in order to minimise any potential noise nuisance and Protective Services has stated no amplified or live music shall be emitted from, or located within the beer garden. These measures will help to minimise any potential impacts, although it is difficult to gauge the impact this proposal will have on residents, who whilst are near, are at least 30 metres away. Whilst I am reasonably satisfied there will be only a minimal impact on nearby residents, It is considered appropriate in this case to grant a temporary consent, in order to allow the Council to assess the impact of the development over a 2 year period. Therefore, having taken account of all the objections received, discussed in paragraph 3.3, it is recommended planning permission be granted for a 2 year period.

Note: Request for Site Visit by Objector