Agenda item - BH2010/03696 - 6-8 St James St

Installation of storage containers incorporating sound insulated panelling and removal of Dawson’s chiller unit from service yard. Removal of existing palisade fencing and erection of new acoustic fencing and gates to service yard.  (Part retrospective).

Recommendation - GRANT

(1)                   Installation of storage containers incorporating sound insulated panelling and removal of Dawson’s chiller unit from service yard. Removal of existing palisade fencing and erection of new acoustic fencing and gates to service yard. (Part retrospective)

(2)                   It was noted that the application had formed to subject of a site visit prior to the meeting.

(3)                   The Area Planning Manager (West) gave a presentation for Application BH2010/03696 for full planning permission and Application BH2010/03717 for the variation of an existing condition detailing the schemes by references to plans and photographs. The applications sought the installation of new insulation around an existing storage unit and the removal of an unauthorised storage unit; the erection of acoustic fencing and a variation to allow deliveries to take place on Sundays. The main considerations related to the visual impact and the potential noise disturbance that could be caused. Although the Heritage team had suggested the height of the fencing be reduced it was felt that this would reduce the effectiveness of the mitigation provided by the acoustic fencing. In relation to the change of hours it was highlighted that the Environmental Health team had stated the proposals were acceptable. Both applications were recommended for approval subject to the reasons set out in the report.

Public Speakers and Questions

(4)                   Mr Patrick, a local resident, spoke in objection to the application and stated the erection of the acoustic fencing would have an overbearing impact on his neighbouring property. He stated that the fencing was to prevent trespassing onto the site, but the operators had taken adequate steps to address these problems without the need for the additional fencing. In relation to lorries it was explained that they would now have less room to manoeuvre which would create more noise nuisance. The extension of delivery hours to Sundays was unnecessary and the operators were already taking deliveries without the necessary permission in place.

(5)                   Councillor Hyde stated that the fencing was for acoustic purposes, and asked if there were existing problems with noise at the site and if the fencing would be beneficial. In response Mr Patrick explained it was unnecessary as his living room was above the line of the fencing.

(6)                   Mr Grota, the agent for the applicant, spoke in support of the application and apologised for any inconvenience and stress caused to Mr Patrick. The applicant had worked to reduce noise levels and the application proposed a material that would reduce sound as well as providing additional security. In relation to the extension of delivery hours to Sundays it was explained that this was necessary as Sunday trading had grown significantly since the original planning permission was granted, and the amendments would allow a flexible window for deliveries.

(7)                   Councillor Hyde asked how many deliveries currently took place Monday to Saturday, and Mr Grota explained that he did not have this information.

(8)                   Councillor Hawtree asked if there were any measures which could be taken to improve the bulk of the fencing, and it was explained that this could be done at the side elevation, but not around the bin store.

(9)                   Councillor Deane asked if there was any scope to condense deliveries, and it was explained that due to the size of the storage facilities this was not possible.

Questions for Officers

(10)               In response to a query from Councillor Cobb it was noted that the recommendations outlined by Environmental Health at p. 237 of the agenda had not been included in the Officers recommendation.

(11)               Councillor Shanks asked why no enforcement action had been taken in relation to the Sunday deliveries; in response the Head of Development Control explained that a decision had been taken to not pursue enforcement as the operators had taken active steps to regularise the current arrangements.

(12)               On a vote of 10 to 2 planning permission was granted.

175.5    RESOLVED – That the Committee has taken into consideration and agrees with the reasons for the recommendation and the policies and guidance set out in the report and resolves to GRANT planning permission subject to the conditions and informatives set out in the report.