Agenda item
83 New Road, London, E1 1HH (PA/12/00605)
- Meeting of Development Committee, Wednesday, 10th October, 2012 7.00 p.m. (Item 7.3)
- View the background to item 7.3
Decision:
On a vote of 1 for the officer’s recommendation, 2 against the officer’s recommendation and 1 abstention the Committee RESOLVED:
That planning permission (PA/12/00605) at 83 New Road, London, E1 1HH (PA/12/00605) London be NOT GRANTED for Change of use from (A1) retail to mixed use coffee shop and restaurant (A1/A3) with no primary hot food cooking facilities, no associated extract flue system and seating area limited to ground floor only; including retention of No.4 AC units and alterations to shop front including new access door.
The Committee indicated that they were minded to refuse the planning permission because of Members’ concerns over:
- The impact on residents, particularly from increased noise and nuisance from the proposal arising as a result of the general comings and goings of patrons;
- Overconcentration of A3 uses in the area.
In accordance with Development Procedural Rules, the application was DEFERRED to enable Officers to prepare a supplementary report to a future meeting of the Committee setting out proposed detailed reasons for refusal and the implications of the decision.
(The Members that voted on this item were Councillors Helal Abbas, Shiria Khatun, Craig Aston, Kosru Uddin)
Minutes:
Jerry Bell (Applications Team Leader) introduced the report on 83 New Road, London, E1 1HH (PA/12/00605)
At this point the Chair asked if there was any speaker present to represent the Applicant. It was noted that there was nobody in attendance in this capacity. (Despite the Applicant having been contacted earlier on in the week and invited to appoint a representative to address the objectors at the meeting).
The Chair therefore invited the two registered objectors to address the meeting.
Mukit Uddin stated that he was speaking as a resident of the road. A key concern was the noise and smell from the shop. The area was a residential area. Pollution from the shop often goes into his propriety. As a result they can’t open their windows in the summer. Noise from the AC units could be heard in his flat. He considered that the premises had been operating without the required planning permission. He stated that he had written to both the Planning Department and Environmental Health over many years about the noise, smell and anti social behaviour (ASB).
He referred to an oversaturation of A3 uses and to a nearby application for an A3 conversion rejected by the Council due to the overconcentration in the area. Given this, the application should also be rejected on the same grounds. The proposal would worsen the existing traffic problems and cause ASB.
He asked Members to take into account the concerns about overconcentration, noise especially from the grill as experienced at other A3 units.
The Chair clarified for Members that there would no hot food cooking facilities on the premises. Mr Uddin accepted this, but feared that the permission would facilitate a move to acquire such facilities.
In response to Members about the affect on his property, he replied that he lived at the back of the premises. A key impact was the noise and smell that created an odour in his property especially if the premises air conditioning was in operation. His windows were in short proximity to the shop. Despite the lack of hot food on premises, there was no certainty that a flue would not be built. If this could be guaranteed (that there was no flue) he would be happy with the planning application.
The Chair reminded the meeting that the Committee could only consider the application before it not speculation on future intentions.
In reply to further questions, Mr Uddin feared that this permission could set a precedent for further A3 conversions adding to the over concentration.
Mushtaq Ali speaking in objection reported that he was representing the grill next door and they also owned another nearby premises. He objected on the grounds of competition from the A3 use and that it would set a precedent for nearby cafes to convert to A3.
The Chair clarified that competition was not a planning matter.
In reply to Members, Mr Ali feared an increase in noise levels, congestion on the pavement and parking stress if permission was granted. It would worsen the existing problems in these areas.
Elaine Bailey (Planning Officer) presented the application for change of use to mixed use coffee shop and restaurant (A1/A3). She explained the site location that was within the Conservation Area and comprised a mixture of uses. She explained the floor plan layout with seating limited to the ground floor and the alterations to the front elevation. The design including the AC units were in keeping with the area. The loss of pure A1 was acceptable given the high provision of such units in the area. The Conservation Area Officer and Environmental Health were satisfied with the plans subject to conditions and a further noise report.
She emphasised the conditions to mitigate any potential impact. Specifically that there be no hot food cooking on site at all, no extract flue and a limited seating area.
She addressed the main issues around: noise, smell, parking and over concentration of A3 uses. It was considered that the scheme was acceptable on these grounds given the restrictions and that it was only a partial A3 use. Furthermore the Highways Services felt that the parking impact would be minimal due to the above and the 9pm closing time. This would also limit late night nuisance.
The conditions fully mitigated the impact. So the scheme should be granted.
The granting of a full A3 use would require a further permission.
Members then raised questions about the following issues:
- The A3 use – the changes that required this.
- The recent enforcement history.
- The impact on the upper floor units. Whether they were occupied.
- The noise levels from the kitchen fans.
- Impact on traffic. A Member considered that the scheme would worsen existing traffic problems.
Officers replied that an application for full A3 use was refused in 2010. The A3 permission was required for the seating element. The established use of the building was A1 retail.
The role of enforcement in this case was outlined. However Members were informed that this was not a relevant planning matter. It was anticipated that the local residents would take an active role in monitoring the impacts, judging by their level of interest in this application to date. According to Environmental Health, the noise from the fans would not exceed 10 decibels below background levels.
On a vote of 1 for the officer’s recommendation, 2 against the officer’s recommendation and 1 abstention the Committee RESOLVED:
That planning permission (PA/12/00605) at 83 New Road, London, E1 1HH (PA/12/00605) London be NOT GRANTED for Change of use from (A1) retail to mixed use coffee shop and restaurant (A1/A3) with no primary hot food cooking facilities, no associated extract flue system and seating area limited to ground floor only; including retention of No.4 AC units and alterations to shop front including new access door.
The Committee indicated that they were minded to refuse the planning permission because of Members’ concerns over:
- The impact on residents, particularly from increased noise and nuisance from the proposal arising as a result of the general comings and goings of patrons;
- Overconcentration of A3 uses in the area.
In accordance with Development Procedural Rules, the application was DEFERRED to enable Officers to prepare a supplementary report to a future meeting of the Committee setting out proposed detailed reasons for refusal and the implications of the decision.
(The Members that voted on this item were Councillors Helal Abbas, Shiria Khatun, Craig Aston, Kosru Uddin)
Supporting documents: