Objections to Planning Application 15/02306/DC & 15/02303/DC

69 Nithsdale Road, G41 2AJ

External alterations to listed building

I formally object to the Planning Application 15/02306/DC and Listed Building Consent 15/02303/DC. This is the third time this applicant has proposed altering the front elevation and creating rear access for the public house and function room. The permission granted in 2014 was subject to conditions some of which this application seeks to alter and which if granted will contravene many sections of the City Plan 2 and design statements for Conservation Areas.

This new application contravenes the same sections of the City Plan and design statements as it will create disturbance and noise at the rear of residential dwellings, the fire escape will overlook residential properties and a B Listed building would be detrimentally altered.

Specific areas of concern

The creation of an external rear staircase and platform described in the application as a fire escape. The objections to the fire escape and concerns that it will be used for out door drinking and smoking made in connection with the 2014 application and as set out below remain. The permission granted in 2014 was subject to the following condition

07. For the avoidance of doubt and in the interest of clarity the fire exit to the rear shall be used

as a fire exit only and shall be operated by a break glass system at all times hereafter and

shall not be used for any other purpose, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Planning

Authority.

Reason: In order to safeguard the property itself and the amenity of the surrounding area.

The plans attached to the current application appear to refer to a push bar control on the exit door to the fire escape. A push bar control will not prevent access to the fire escape save in emergency. There is a real risk that without a break glass control the door will be propped open or opened frequently by staff and customers to allow smoking and or drinking on the platform and steps and access to the garden; the emergency exit will become a de facto rear entrance and exit. This will result in an unacceptable loss of amenity to the adjacent residential properties as a result of noise and cigarette smoke. An article in The Herald (19/7/2015) shortly after Lebowskis popped up, suggested a beer garden at the rear was a possibility. Even if the current pub tenants do not do this the neighbourhood is vulnerable to exploitation of the rear access in the future if a break glass system is not installed.

Alteration of existing side windows and creation of new windows

The windows to the side and rear are to be glazed in clear glass. These windows have sight lines into the private gardens and bedroom windows of residential properties on Moray Place and Regent Park Square. They should be glazed in opaque glass. The application does not state whether the windows will open or not. The windows should not be able to be opened as this would result in an unacceptable level of noise leaking out to the detriment of the residential amenity of the adjacent buildings. The windows should be sound-proofed to prevent an unacceptable level of noise leaking out to the detriment of the residential amenity of the adjacent buildings.

The addition of a large new window that will look out into the private gardens and bedrooms of houses on Moray Place is an unreasonable detriment to their residential amenity.

The new door onto the rear platform and external staircase is part glazed – the same points made above apply to the glass in the rear door.

Installation of roof light

The proposed roof light is directly under the bedroom windows of flats in Nithsdale Road. The application does not state whether the roof light will open and whether it will be sound proofed. The roof light should not open, should not be clear glass and should be sound proofed to prevent an unacceptable level of noise leaking out to the detriment of the residential amenity of the adjacent buildings.

Installation of Kitchen vent to the rear of the property

The vent will produce noise and odours for most of the day and evening which will have an unacceptable detrimental impact on the residential amenity of the neighbouring properties in Nithsdale Road, Moray Place and Regent Park Square. The proposed vent will discharge odours below the roof ridge of buildings less than 20 m away. It will discharge into an enclosed area of back courts and gardens where odours will not readily disperse and sound will be amplified.

Guidance on the Control of Odour and Noise from Commercial Kitchen Exhaust Systems

Minimum Requirements For Odour Control DEFRA (2005)

Objectives

- for new premises or premises covered by planning conditions restricting the impact

of odour the system shall be designed to prevent harm to the amenity.

- for existing premises not covered by planning conditions restricting the impact of

odour, the system shall be designed to avoid statutory nuisance and shall comply

with the principles of Best Practical Means.

To achieve these objective the odour control system shall include an adequate level of:

1. odour control; and

2. stack dispersion.

The overall performance of the odour abatement system will represent a balance of 1

and 2.

Discharge stack

The discharge stack shall:

1. Discharge the extracted air not less than 1 m above the roof ridge of any building

within 20 m of the building housing the commercial kitchen.

2. If 1 cannot be complied with for planning reasons, then the extracted air shall be

discharged not less than 1 m above the roof eaves or dormer window of the building

11

housing the commercial kitchen. Additional odour control measures may be

required.

3. If 1 or 2 cannot be complied with for planning reasons, then an exceptionally high

level of odour control will be required.

Minimum Requirements For Noise Control

For new premises or premises covered by planning conditions restricting the impact of

noise the system shall be designed to prevent an acoustic impact on the external

environment and therefore harm to the amenity, as well as ensuring that noise exposure

of kitchen staff does not constitute a hearing hazard.

For existing premises not covered by planning conditions restricting the impact of noise,

the system shall be designed to avoid statutory nuisance and shall comply with the

principles of Best Practicable Means.

To achieve these objectives the noise control system shall include:

• control of noise at source to the greatest extent possible (with the added benefit of

hearing protection); and

• control of noise to the environment by taking acoustic considerations into account

within duct, grille and termination design.

12

The control system should meet the requirements laid down in BS4142: 1997 “Method

for Rating industrial noise affecting mixed residential and industrial areas[2]”.

City Plan 2 – SC 11

This sets out development policy for public houses, hot food shops and Class 3 (food and drink) and 11 (assembly and leisure) uses. This proposed development would clearly contravene this policy and therefore I formally object to the Planning Application 15/02306/DC

“Proposals... should not result in significant adverse effect on the amenity of adjacent residents through the effect of noise” (SC 11)

“These uses should not be located within, or immediately adjacent to, existing residential property” (SC 11)

  • An outdoor deck area and associated steps and gate in the backcourt of the tenement at 67/69 Nithsdale Road will produce a huge amount of noise from opening time until late in the evening at closing time. This is immediately adjacent to the family bedrooms of all the houses between 1 and 10 Moray Place, a significant portion of Regent Park Square and Nithsdale Road itself.
  • The proposed deck, stairs and gate are within the enclosed space of backcourts and gardens, which act as a natural sound box, so amplifying any noise to cause major disturbance for people within their own homes. A large number of children live in these houses and have their bedrooms on what is considered the quiet side of the tenements or houses.
  • Even a small number of people using the outside deck and stairs for smoking will cause a huge amount of noise disturbance and this can be expected to happen all day and through into the night, every day - not just in the summer
  • The creation of new gate into the back lane and door into the public house will further increase noise levels as people enter and exit the premises from this rear gate and staircase rather than the front entrance on the street. This will cause a greater footfall within the lane area as a whole as people walk or drive to the premises, again creating noise and disturbance. It is also unsafe to have a concealed exit straight onto a vehicular lane used by residents and by large refuse collection vehicles.
  • The proposal includes provision for 1.8 meter high, galvanised metal and wood screens on the new ground level entrance from the lane. These project into the lane and will potentially block access to their properties and garages for residents. These structures will also potentially stop the cleansing department gaining access to the area for rubbish collection.
  • The plan includes provision of a new part glazed door out onto a deck. As people enter and exit the public house any noise inside will leak out into the backcourt area and to resident’s homes. Residents are already bothered by noise leaking from the venue and the creation of a new door will increase this disturbance greatly.
  • There is also a proposal to remove the present glass bricks from wall openings to create windows. This will be a potential source of sound disturbance to residential homes and will offer views into adjacent residential rooms.
  • The policy states that outdoor provision of food and drink areas will only be supported if they :

“do not give rise to noise levels likely to impact on residential amenity” (SC 11)

and they should not be :

“directly overlooked by residential property” (SC 11)

  • The outdoor area will be provided with lighting. This is likely to cause disturbance to neighbouring residential properties being positioned on the rear wall of the tenement and because it will need to be bright enough to ensure the safety of patrons.
  • The garden area at the rear of the tenement property is visible to most of the residents of Moray Place, a substantial proportion of those in Regent Park Square and of Nithsdale Road – including the flats within the building itself. Providing stairs will lead to the use of the garden by the public house.
  • The section PUBLIC HOUSES AND CLASS 11 USES (Outwith City Centre) Section of SC 11 prohibits the use of a backcourt area for the purpose of Class 3 and Class 11 activity. The policy specifically defines the backcourt area as :

“the quiet side of tenements”(SC 11)

and further requires that :

“Extensions to existing premises should not increase the floorspace for public use under residential flats, or extend into backcourt areas” (SC 11)

The policy then clearly states that the protection of residential amenity is paramount and that no Class 3 use is permitted in lanes with homes backing on to them.

“REAR LANES

In order to protect residential amenity, the Council will not support:

hot food shops, public houses and Class 3 uses in lanes that are immediately adjacent to residential properties” ”(SC 11)

  • There is every indication that this 2.2 meter high deck will be used as an extension to the public house. The plans describe this door and structure as a fire escape, but it seems puzzling that such a workaday structure (which we would all hope is never needed) has a 1.8m privacy screen. This indicates that the applicant is anticipating people will be out on the deck – probably to smoke and potentially to drink, as well as to enter and exit the venue. The structure also has a glass balustrade, which seems to indicate that the applicant again expects customers to use this as an entrance and exit to the venue.
  • Determining whether a fire escape is needed is not within the remit of material considerations for this planning application (Planning Circular 3/2013 - Development Management Procedures) and so the structure should only be considered on it’s merits relating to noise, access, privacy and design standards etc.

City Plan 2 – Article 4 Directions

Strathbungo Conservation Area Appraisal

DES 3 - Protecting and Enhancing the City's Historic Environment

  • The tenement at 67/69 Nithsdale Road includes on the ground floor the public house that has made application for alterations. The proposals would affect the character and structure of the whole B-listed building.
  • The proposal would mean the loss, at the front, of two traditional windows to the ground floor. Replacements have no astragals, which would be contrary to the style of the building.
  • The creation of an opening through the listed wall that presently encloses the backcourt garden is contrary to the conservation area policy of retaining the integrity and position of walls.

“Back Lanes

The erosion of character of the back lanes caused by frequent demolition and relocation/rebuilding of rear boundary walls and dilapidation of original cobbled surfacing diminishes the historic character and appearance of the Conservation Area” (Article 4 Directions)

  • The proposal includes provision for 1.8 meter high, galvanised metal and wood screens on the new ground level entrance from the lane. These project into the lane and will potentially block access to their properties and garages for residents. These structures will also potentially stop the cleansing department gaining access to the area for rubbish collection.
  • The creation of a decked area and associated stairway at the rear of the B-listed building is inappropriate in it’s positioning, bulk and detailing. It would be 2.2 meters high and constructed of timber, glass and galvanised metal – none being traditional materials. It will be visible from every house in A-listed 1 – 10 Moray Place, a great number of B-listed houses in Regent Park Square and from B-listed properties in Nithsdale Road itself. It would be visible from the lane behind Moray Place and from the lane at the rear of Nithsdale Road and Regent Park Square.

“proposals for the alteration of a listed building must:

incorporate detailed design and materials which reflect the period, style and architectural character of the building;” (DES 3)

Further, the policy requires :

“Proposals for the extension of a listed building must ensure that:

  • the scale is subservient to the original building;
  • its location, design, scale, massing and proportion protects the building's appearance, character and setting; and
  • the detailed design and use of materials are appropriate to the building's period, style and character.” (DES 3)
  • This structure will diminish the historic character and appearance of the Conservation Area - the back lanes being particularly noted in the Conservation Area Appraisal as a key feature.
  • The 1.8 meter high privacy screen that is proposed to run down the side of the decked area will dominate and obscure the view out into the backcourts from residential homes at the sides of the development. As the screens will be positioned on the deck, their overall height will be 4 meters or over 13 feet. They are inappropriate to be attached to the side of a listed building in a key part of a conservation area and will diminish the character of the back lanes.

City Plan 2 : Development Policy – Town Centre (DEV4)

This policy is concerned with encouraging developments in designated town centre areas but the quality of life for residents is specifically considered and given special weight.

“In considering proposed developments, the Council will give priority to improving the environmental quality, vitality and viability and residential amenity of these areas”

This proposed development would clearly contravene many of the policies laid out in City Plan 2 and therefore I formally object to the Planning Application 15/02306/DC and Listed Building Consent 15/02303/DC. I urge that the two applications be rejected.