Agenda item
Brilliant Kids, 8 Station Terrace, London, NW10 5RT (09/2176)
Decision:
Application deferred for a site visit in order to assess the impact of the proposal.
Minutes:
09/2176 |
Variation of condition 3 of full planning permission 06/0712, granted 29/06/2006, for change of use from Use Class A1 (retail) to mixed-use A1 and A3 (retail & cafe), to allow operating hours on Monday to Saturday 0800 to 2300 and Sunday 1000 to 2230.
|
OFFICER RECOMMENDATION: Grant planning permission subject to informatives. |
The Planning Manager, Andy Bates drew Members’ attention to the supplementary information circulated at the meeting which included details submitted by the applicant on the proposed sound proofing system and amendments to condition 3.
Ms Julia Harvey, a local resident, stated that noise from the premises was a problem when it had previously been used as a café. She felt that the current application would cause further problems as it proposed to extend the operating hours from a closing time of 20.00 to 23.00 Monday to Saturday and to 22.30 Sunday. Ms Harvey added that she was not aware of any other restaurant within the residential area, situated adjacent to a ground floor flat and which opened at unsociable times. In addition, the proposed cafe was adjacent to her baby’s bedroom and as such would disrupt his sleep. Ms Harvey expressed concern that the lean-to on the site would result in excessive noise in the alleyway.
Stewart Freeman, in objecting to the application, confirmed that he was the freeholder of the property in which Julia Harvey lived. He also queried why extended hours were being proposed in view of the noise problems reported about the premises in the past. He also enquired as to how the lean-to could be soundproofed and whether this feature could be removed. Stewart Freeman requested the Committee to agree to a site visit in order to assess the impact of the proposal.
During discussion, Councillor Cummins felt that it would be reasonable to restrict the operating hours to 20.00 in view of the proximity of the premises to residential dwellings. In noting that the previous owner had breached the condition concerning non-use of the rear garden, Councillor Cummins stated that enforcement action should be taken if this condition was breached again by the applicant. He sought views with regard to the lean-to and felt that the applicant should be asked to confirm its’ removal and suggested that a site visit would be useful. Councillor H M Patel sought confirmation with regard to the condition which prevented use of the rear garden by the café. The Chair sought confirmation of the location of the adjoining property’s bedroom in relation to the café.
In reply, the Planning Manager confirmed that there was a condition which prevented use of the rear garden as an eating area for customers and that this had been an enforcement issue with the previous owner. He did not think that the current applicant intended to make use of the rear garden as part of the café, which would have access problems for customers according to the design plans that had been submitted. Members heard that the applicant was aware that use of the lean-to did not have planning permission and that its use had not been included in the proposals. The present planning permission permitted use of the premises up to 20.00, however the new application, although would permit use up to 23.00 also included a condition requiring sufficient soundproofing. In addition, the café was not to open until 10.00 on Sundays, as opposed to 08.00 under current planning permission. Andy Bates confirmed that the bedroom of the objector was immediately adjacent to the café and that the lean-to was next to the objector’s window.
Members then agreed to Councillor Cummins motion that the application be deferred for a site visit to assess the impact of the proposals.
Supporting documents: