Town Council. Report Author/Case Officer: Alex Harrison Contact Details:

Transcription

1 Application Number: 09/00330/FUL ERECTION OF TWO STOREY SIDE EXTENSION AT The Pink Punters, 2 Watling Street, Fenny Stratford FOR Mr F McMahon Target: 27th April 2009 Ward: Bletchley And Fenny Stratford Parish: Bletchley & Fenny Stratford Town Council Report Author/Case Officer: Alex Harrison Contact Details: alex.harrison@milton-keynes.gov.uk Team Leader: Andrew Horner Contact Details: andrew.horner@milton-keynes.gov.uk 1.0 SUMMARY (A brief explanation of what the application is about, what the main issues are and the officer's Recommendation to the Committee) 1.1 The application property is a nightclub. There have been some problems in the past with noise disturbance for local residents as a result of music being played in the nightclub and from people and vehicles arriving at and leaving the property. The current application is in part an attempt to reduce some of the noise and disturbance resulting from vehicles arriving/leaving the site and manoeuvring within the site and is an amended version of a previously approved extension. 1.2 There has also been a history of developments being carried out without or not fully in accordance with planning permission on the site. This has resulted in a number of retrospective planning applications. However it should be noted that this is not a valid reason for refusing planning permission for the current application. 1.3 The main issues to be considered are: 1. The impact on the character and appearance of the area. 2. The impact on noise and amenity of neighbouring residents. 3. The impact on parking provision and highway safety and convenience. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that planning permission be granted subject to the conditions set out at the end of this report. (19)

2 2.0 REASON FOR REPORTING APPLICATION TO THE PANEL (Most planning applications are dealt with by the Chief Planning Officer under powers delegated by the Development Control Committee) 2.1 An objection to the proposal has been received from Bletchley and Fenny Stratford Town Council and the application cannot, therefore, be dealt with under officer's delegated powers. 3.0 INTRODUCTION (A brief description of the site and its surroundings) 3.1 The application property is a nightclub situated on the south-eastern extremity of Fenny Stratford. There are industrial/commercial properties immediately to the north-west and north of the site. The River Ouzel forms the eastern and part of the northern boundary of the site. On the opposite side of the river is Dobbies Garden Centre and (to the north) Belvedere Farm. On the opposite side of Watling Street there is a large, modern hotel and, closer to the centre of Fenny Stratford, a modern residential development (Penn Road and Saracens Wharf). 3.2 The nightclub building is largely confined to the north-western end of the site. The remainder of the site is given over to a car parking area on two distinct levels; carriageway level on the road side and then 2m lower close to the river. Some bays are marked out, but the area is generally untidy, with building materials/rubble piled up at the south-eastern corner (close to where the new access is proposed). 3.3 There is a line of large trees along the Watling Street frontage and the boundary with the River Ouzel is also heavily treed. The land falls significantly from Watling Street down to the river. 3.4 The site has a long planning history mainly relating to extensions and structures associated with the current club (the building was previously a Public House). There have also been a number of Enforcement issues relating to the site. 4.0 RELEVANT POLICIES (The most important policy considerations relating to this application) 4.1 The most important factor that the Committee must consider is the relevant planning policies. Firstly there are the Council's own planning policies, particularly the policies in the Adopted Local Plan, but including other policy documents such as Supplementary Planning Guidance (SPG). Relevant Government policy documents, such as Planning Policy Statements (PPS) or Planning Policy Guidance (PPG) and Circulars also need to be considered, along with Regional Plans and policies. Planning legislation requires that all planning decisions should be in line with the relevant policies. (20)

3 4.2 Local Policies The following policies of the Adopted Local Plan are considered relevant: D1 Impact upon Locality. D2 Design of New Buildings T15 Car Parking 5.0 RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY (A brief outline of previous planning decisions affecting the site this may not include every planning application relating to this site, only those that have a bearing on this particular case) 00/00723/FUL Change of use from public house to mixed use as restaurant and guest house including the retention of alterations to elevations and the retention of outbuildings, alterations to vehicular access and construction of car park. Permitted /00049/FUL First floor rear extension (retrospective). Permitted /01802/FUL Retention of subterranean building and alterations to approved parking layout. Permitted /01683/FUL Three storey side extension. Permitted /00235/FUL Demolition of existing outbuilding and retention of rear extension. Permitted /01941/FUL Two storey rear extension to provide enclosed storage and covered smoking area and erection of car port (retrospective). Permitted /01006/FUL Erection of a canopy above the existing car port to provide covered smoking area. Permitted /01573/FUL Proposed repositioning of vehicular access, alterations and extensions to parking area and erection of security gatehouse (part retrospective). Permitted (21)

4 6.0 APPLICATION AS ORIGINALLY SUBMITTED (Details of the proposal as originally submitted) 6.1 Planning permission is sought for the construction of a two storey side extension to the building. The building will provide floorspace over 3 storeys and would sit on a footprint of square metres providing a total of 423 square metres of accommodation. The proposal would provide storage and staff areas for the nightclub itself and at lower ground floor level; seating and toilet facilities for the club would be provided at ground floor level and additional living accommodation for the owner would be found at first floor level. 6.2 Planning permission was granted for a two storey extension in this location in 2004 (04/01683/FUL) and since works began on this extension the applicant made a number of amendments to the originally permitted scheme. Following discussions with Officers it was concluded that the cumulative impact of these changes materially altered the proposal and a new planning application would be required. As a result this application is part retrospective. 6.3 As with the previously approved application the proposal seeks to improve the living conditions of the owner and enhance staff facilities while at the same time providing an improved internal layout. In comparison to the previously approved proposal the scheme results in an additional square metres of floorspace but also has a loss of a 28 square metre store building resulting in a square metre gain. The revised proposal is approximately 1.2 metres higher than that previously approved and stands approximately 1.5 metres higher than the existing building. 7.0 AMENDMENTS (Any changes that have been made to the application since it was originally submitted) 7.1 Amended plans were submitted following comments made by the Environmental Health Officer regarding the internal layout and inaccuracies shown in the plans. 8.0 CONSULTATIONS AND REPRESENTATIONS (Who has been consulted on the application and the responses received) 8.1 Bletchley and fenny Stratford Town Council: The Town Council objects to this application on the following grounds: 1. That this is yet again a retrospective application by the applicant. Work has already started and this makes a mockery of the planning process. This applicant has made (and been granted) retrospective applications on a number of occasions and this should not be allowed to continue. The correct and proper planning process should be followed which is to obtain planning permission before commencing any works. 2. The Town Council believes that further development on this site leads to over development in this area making the appearance too built up and too cluttered. (22)

5 3. The increased area will allow more people to attend Pink Punters which will therefore increase further the noise from the site, especially at opening and closing hours. A larger building leads to increased capacity, leading to increased noise. 8.2 Archaeology: No comments 8.3 Landscape: No real landscape issues, but there may be an opportunity to improve the front boundary treatment, separating the car park from Watling Street. The boundary contains a line of TPO d trees, but below the trees is used as an area for storage of building materials. The area should have all materials removed and a hedge boundary treatment planted along the boundary. 8.4 Environment Agency: Have advised that the proposed development will only be acceptable if the following planning conditions are imposed in respect of building floor levels and prevention of the deposit of materials in the floodplain. 8.5 Highways Engineer Development Control I note that this application is similar to 04/01683/FUL and also 08/01573/FUL in respect of the highway works. The conditions that highways recommended to be applied for the 2008 application are therefore still applicable but with a minor amendment to the one on pedestrian access. The proposed conditions cover a range of highway issues and are reproduced in full in section 11 of this report (conditions 5-10 inclusive). The engineer has also recommended that informatives regarding the need for highways agreements/approvals to be secured. 8.6 Environmental Health The plans are not completely accurate:- On the Lower Ground Floor, the front elevation lobby is not as existing, nor will it be as proposed. The Ground Floor front elevation fire exit is not as existing, nor will it be as proposed. Also, I will need details of the proposed front elevation window, (from the point-of-view of noise breakout). There are internal doors, which are not show on the plan. On the First Floor, the internal layout is not quite as shown. The front elevation doors onto the flat roof are not, and will not be as shown on the map. The Licensing Officer and I are happy to deal with things informally, but I have advised Frank McMahon that he will need to produce accurate drawings. I'm (23)

6 not sure where this leaves things from a Planning perspective. I reassured Frank that it is unlikely he will have to make a fresh Planning Application, but that you may require a minor amendment. As noted above the necessary amended plans have been received and the discussion at 9.3 and 9.4 of this report is based on the amended details and discussion with Environmental Health Officers 8.7 Local Residents The occupiers of the following properties were notified of the application: Belvedere Farm Belvedere Lane Watling Street Thames Valley Ambulances 1 Watling Terrace Unit 2 Watling Terrace (inclusive) Penn Road 4 Watling Street Campanile Hotel Watling Street Larch Ltd Larch House Oak Road No third party comments have been received. 9.0 CONSIDERATIONS (The analysis of the issues which are critical, material, considerations and/or of greatest concern to objectors for the Committee to weigh up before making a decision) 9.1 The impact on the character and appearance of the area. The Town Council has objected on the grounds that the works constitute overdevelopment of the site and result in clutter. Consideration has to be given to the fact that planning permission has already been granted for a similar extension in this location. The previous approval had less of an impact in terms of scale and bulk than this current scheme but the issue is whether or not the additional size of this revised proposal now leads to a significantly detrimental impact. 9.2 The form and appearance of the proposed extension match the character of the existing building. The overall bulk would still be less than that apparent with the existing building. While the scale is larger resulting in the ridge height of the proposal being higher than the existing building, it is considered that the extension would not be overly prominent or dominant from the streetscene. 9.3 The impact on noise and amenity of neighbouring residents. The Environmental Health Officer raised concerns over the proposal as first submitted because it did not reflect the existing layout. This is important as the current layout is such that rooms and areas serve as noise break-out areas which address the issue of noise impact on neighbouring buildings and the area. The amended plans addressed this concern and ensure that the noise break-out areas are retained. The new areas proposed within the extension are not considered to have a significant impact regarding noise as they are largely not areas that would be subject to the nightclub music and use. A seating area (24)

7 is proposed at ground floor level but this did not cause concerns for Environmental Health. In any case this area faces onto the car park area and road and so would have a negligible impact. 9.4 The Town Council has objected that the increased floor area will result in increased people attending the site and therefore increased noise. As explained the majority of proposed additional floor area is either for staff facilities or living accommodation of the owner and therefore the increased floor area of the nightclub is minimal. Taking the toilet facilities and seating area proposed at ground floor level the increase in nightclub floorspace is square metres. Approximately half of this floorspace is for either toilet or ancillary uses and therefore the increased floor area for customers is considered to be negligible in comparison to the existing club. As a result it is considered that there would be no detrimental impact on neighbouring residential amenity as a result of this proposal. 9.5 The impact on parking provision and highway safety and convenience. The Highways Engineer Development Control has considered the application both in light of the previous extension and the recently approved application to amend the parking and access layout for the site (08/01573/FUL). There is an increase in floor area over the previous approval but it is considered that the site can accommodate any increased demand within its current capacity. As previously noted the majority of the additional floor area is for staff or the owner and therefore the latter does not result in the need to provide additional space. 9.6 The Highways Engineer Development Control s previous comments on 04/01683/FUL read: I am satisfied that an additional fifteen spaces for the extension is sufficient. However the location of some of the spaces is unacceptable. The space numbered 67 is too close to the car park access and should be re-sited away from its current location. The width between the piers to the walls surrounding spaces 68, 1 and 2 is only 7 metres. Three spaces should be allotted a width of 7.50 metres and I would therefore ask that this width is either increased or the spaces are re-sited elsewhere. Any increase in width should not be to the detriment of the aisle between the proposed extension and car park space 68. I would suggest that use is made of the car parking area housing spaces to accommodate the re-sited spaces by making it double sided. Whilst I have no objections in principle to planning consent being issued, I will need to see the required revisions to the parking layout. I therefore request that the applicant be asked to revise his plans to show the required alterations to the parking layout. The application was determined with these aspects being resolved with all spaces being accessible. It is considered that this revised proposal can be accommodated with this layout. Furthermore, the parking layout as submitted reflects that approved under 08/01573/FUL with the exception of a minor (25)

8 alteration to the pedestrian access. This does not affect the parking provision or access to the spaces and is therefore considered to be acceptable. 9.7 Conditions. There have been a number of conditions proposed by consultees. The Environment Agency conditions are considered to be reasonable and justified given the proximity of the site within the floodplain. A total of 6 conditions are requested by the Highways Engineer Development Control. These conditions, as suggested in the comments, were applicable and included in the application to reconfigure the car park area. However the parking layout plan with this proposal is a later version of the plan approved under the previous application. While the access and parking layout remain the same it will therefore be necessary to apply those conditions again to be enforceable on the new plan. 9.8 The Landscape Architect also made comments that the front of the site would benefit from planting. A landscaping scheme was previously required and for the same reasons above it should be included on this decision notice as well CONCLUSIONS (The officer advice to the Development Control Committee on the appropriate decision, based on the policies of the Development Plan, taking into account the issues detailed in the report) 10.1 The proposed extension is acceptable in principle given the previous consent. This revised application shows a larger extension but the increased impact of this is considered to be minimal. There is not considered to be any detrimental impact on the character and appearance of the area or on neighbouring residential amenity and the parking facilities on site can cater for the use CONDITIONS (The conditions that need to be imposed on any planning permission for this development to ensure that the development is satisfactory. To meet legal requirements all conditions must be Necessary, Relevant, Enforceable, Precise and Reasonable ) 1. The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of three years from the date of this permission. Reason: To prevent the accumulation of planning permissions; to enable the Local Planning Authority to review the suitability of the development in the light of altered circumstances; and to comply with section 51 of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act (D11) 2. The external surfaces of the development hereby permitted shall be constructed only of materials of a type and colour which match exactly those of the existing building unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.(M01) Reason: To ensure that the development does not detract from the appearance (26)

9 of the locality. 3. The minimum ground floor level of any building involved in the development must be at least 67.37m AOD unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: to provide reasonable freeboard against flooding and an allowance for climate change. 4. No spoil or materials shall be deposited or stored in the flood plain nor any ground raising is allowed within the floodplain as shown on B22/99/06 Rev M unless expressly authorised in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To prevent the increased risk of flooding due to impedance of flood flows and reduction of flood storage capacity. 5. The proposed development shall not be brought into use until such time that the pedestrian access has been laid out and constructed in accordance with the approved details. Reason: In order to minimise danger, and inconvenience to users of the development on foot. 6. No other part of the development shall begin until the new means of access has been sited and laid out in accordance with the approved drawing and constructed in accordance with Milton Keynes Council's guide note "Residential Vehicle Crossing Details". Reason: In order to minimise danger, obstruction and inconvenience to users of the highway and of the access. 7. Within one month of the new/altered access being brought into use all other existing access points not incorporated in the development hereby permitted shall be stopped up by raising the existing dropped kerb/removing the existing bellmouth/and reinstating the footway verge and highway boundary to the same line, level and detail as the adjoining footway verge and highway boundary. Reason: To limit the number of access points along the site boundary for the safety and convenience of the highway user. 8. No other part of the development shall commence until the access has been laid out to a gradient of 1 in 14 for a minimum distance of 5metres beyond the edge of the footway. Reason: In order to minimise danger, obstruction and inconvenience to users of the highway and of the access. 9. No other part of the development shall begin until visibility splays have been provided on both sides of the access between a point 2.4m along the (27)

10 centre line of the access measured from the edge of the carriageway and a point 70 metres along the edge of the carriageway to the right of the access measured from the intersection of the centre line of the access and to the left a point 120 metres along the edge of the carriageway to the left of the access measured from the intersection of the centre line of the access. The area contained within the splays shall be kept free of any obstruction exceeding 1 metre in height above the nearside channel of the carriageway. Reason: To provide adequate intervisibility between the access and the public highway for the safety and convenience of users of the highway and of the access. 10. The scheme for parking and turning including the taxi and bus set down areas indicated on the submitted plans shall be laid out prior to the initial occupation of the development hereby permitted and that area shall not thereafter be used for any other purpose. Reason: To enable vehicles to draw off, park and turn clear of the highway to minimise danger, obstruction and inconvenience to users of the adjoining highway. 11. A landscaping scheme, which shall include provision for the planting of trees and shrubs, shall be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority before any part of the development is commenced. The scheme shall show the numbers, types and sizes of trees and shrubs to be planted and their location in relation to proposed buildings, roads, footpaths and drains. All planting in accordance with the scheme shall be carried out within twelve months of commencement of development. Any trees or shrubs removed, dying, severely damaged or diseased within two years of planting shall be replaced in the next planting season with trees or shrubs of such size and species as may be agreed by the Local Planning Authority. (L01) Reason: To protect the appearance and character of the area and to minimise the effect of development on the area. (28)

11 (29)

12 (30)

13 (31)

14 (32)

15 (33)

16 (34)

17 (35)