Change of use of ground floor to gymnasium, change of use of first floor to provide 1no. 1 bedroom apartment and 1 x 2 bed and 2 studios together with private amenity space – DEVONSHIRE. One letter of objection had been received.
The relevant planning history for the site was detailed within the report.
A further representation from Cameo’s planning consultant stated that ‘the concerns raised were in relation to the proposed residential units and the impact that the nightclub could have on these in terms of noise levels and general disturbance that could give rise to noise complaints against the established nightclub use. It was stated that neither the applicant nor the Councils noise reports provided sufficient evidence that the site was suitable for residential use. There was no assessment of LAmax (instantaneous noises like shouting and or singing etc.) of noise people whilst Cameo was operating. There had been no assessment of the potential for structure-borne re-radiated music noise in the residential building as a result of vibration transfer from the adjacent Cameo building. By its own admission, the Acoustic Associates report did not provide a full assessment of the predicted noise levels in the apartments, and whether they met the NR15 criterion. Concerns were also raised in relation to the loss of retail in the town centre and the impact on the adjacent heritage asset’.
Cameo’s noise consultant also stated ‘The noise report failed to demonstrate that the noise from either amplified sound or other noise such as patron noise would be inaudible in the properties when the windows were open and that the predicted noise levels seemed unrealistically low in some cases. In addition the Council’s report and conditions relied on the need for windows to be closed to achieve the required internal noise levels in the apartments. This was not the same as having a sealed façade, the conclusion being that occupiers of the residential units could still open windows to attain purge ventilation. The provision of mechanical ventilation would not necessarily over-ride the natural instinct to open windows for extra ventilation. In doing so, the residents may then be exposed to higher-than-acceptable levels of noise from Cameo and passing patrons. There was concern that if the local authority investigated for statutory nuisance and concluded it was reasonable for the occupant to open their windows for additional ventilation, they may then find against Cameo. The report also only dealt with airborne noise transmission and not structure borne re-radiated noise caused by vibrations created by the nightclub transferring into the adjacent building’.
The applicant had also provided a further statement ‘the description of development on the application referred to 2x studios 1x 1bed and 1x2bed. The applicant’s plans showed the 2 bed to be a one bed with study which had assessed the application on the basis that this was used as a 2 bed flat in terms of the floor space and standard of accommodation. Given the applicant would have little control over the resulting use of this second room. The report referred to treble glazing, this was an error as the noise assessment requires a thermal double glazing.
Ms Maccoughlan addressed the committee in objection stating that the proposal may damage the neighbouring nightclub business, with unreasonable restrictions being placed on the nightclub should future residents complain about noise. The site was not suitable for a residential development.
Mr Thomas, agent for the applicant, addressed the committee in response stating that the scheme was supported by planning policy and that the noise aspect had been considered. The noise survey complied with the Council’s requirements and any required mitigation requirements would be controlled by condition and would be tested prior to occupation.
RESOLVED: (By 6 votes with 1 abstention) The permission be granted subject to the following conditions: 1) Time for commencement 2) Approved drawings 3) Development shall be carried out in accordance with the Noise Impact Assessment 4) Submission of a mitigation and control scheme to address noise emitted from the mechanical plant 5) Submission of a building noise mitigation scheme 6) Submission of a scheme of mechanical ventilation requirements of the proposed dwellings that enables adequate airflow without the need to open windows or doors 7) Prior to occupation a written report of the results of acoustic tests undertaken to confirm the adequacy of attenuation achieved 8) Submission of a scheme for the installation and management of any electrically amplified music, public address and media reproduction within the ground floor gym 9) Submission of details in relation to refuse storage and how provision for the commercial unit and residential units shall remain separate 10) Submission of details in relation to the provision of cycle storage for the residential use shall be submitted.