The Assistant Director - Planning, Transportation and Highways will submit a report (Document “AD”) in relation to a full planning application for the construction of a function hall, comprising 2,450 square metres of floor space over three floors, on land at Dick Lane, Bradford – 17/06698/MAF.

 

The report explains that the access to the site will be taken directly off Dick Lane into a car park that will provide 293 parking spaces, 25 cycle spaces and 3 coach parking spaces.

 

Recommended –

 

That the application be approved for the reasons and subject to the conditions set out in the Assistant Director - Planning, Transportation and Highways’ technical report.

 

                                                                        (John Eyles – 01274 434380)

The Assistant Director - Planning, Transportation and Highways presented a report (Document “AD”) in relation to a full planning application for the construction of a function hall, comprising 2,450 square metres of floor space over three floors, on land at Dick Lane, Bradford – 17/06698/MAF.

 

The report explained that the access to the site would be taken directly off Dick Lane into a car park that would provide 293 parking spaces, 25 cycle spaces and 3 coach parking spaces.

 

The Assistant Director - Planning, Transportation and Highways informed Members that three additional representations had been received since the report had been published.  He confirmed that Leeds City Council had been consulted in relation to the boundary and they had not raised any concerns.  With regards to the use class for the facility, D2 had been suggested and this would not raise any implications, as it would be a specific use for a function hall.  It was noted that there were residential properties and industrial buildings in the vicinity and around the site boundary.  The dwellings were a significant distance from the proposal and access to the venue would be from Dick Lane.  A noise survey had been submitted which stated that there would not be an impact on the houses and the Council’s Environmental Health Unit had concurred. 

 

The Assistant Director - Planning, Transportation and Highways explained that concerns had been raised in respect of the use of fireworks at events.  In response the applicant had submitted a Management Plan and confirmed that during an Asian wedding fireworks were only used at the point when the groom arrived.  The Council’s Environmental Health Unit had considered the proposal and was satisfied.  It was noted that a condition prohibiting the use of fireworks would not be enforceable, therefore, the management plan would have to cover such issues.  However, if fireworks were causing a statutory nuisance Environmental Health had statutory powers to deal with the matter.  Planting and an acoustic barrier would be placed on the boundary and was covered by a condition on the application.  The applicant had proposed measures to help mitigate the noise nuisance to residents that included a one way system for the car park, which would be located away from residential properties.  The Assistant Director - Planning, Transportation and Highways  reported that the Council’s Highways Department had requested a Traffic Regulation Order (TRO) to prohibit parking at either side of the access and an additional condition would need to be added if Members were minded to approve the application.  The application was then recommended for approval subject to the conditions as set out in the report and the additional condition for a TRO.      

 

Members were then informed that:

 

·         Data in relation to the parking requirement was still being gathered, however, there needed to be sufficient spaces to cover the approximate number that the venue could accommodate.  Spill over parking was a concern and was the reason behind the request for a TRO.

·         Sporting arenas, for example, were used as a comparator for this type of venue with regards to parking.  There were currently two points of entry onto the site and vehicles could easily migrate onto residential streets to park, therefore, the access from Watt Street would be permanently closed.  Any additional parking would be provided on the industrial area. 

·         Dick Lane was a wide road and there were residential properties opposite.

·         Initial considerations regarding on-street parking had focussed on Wellington Street, however, the access on Watt Street would be removed and the requirement for a parking review could be looked at again.

·         Leeds City Council had not raised any objections in relation to the impact on highways.

·         The Council’s Environmental Health, Air Quality Team had requested that six electric charging points be provided and a further six were available if required. 

·         Further expansion requests would be considered when and if they were submitted.  Concerns would be raised if any further development would result in a reduced parking provision.

·         The hours of use had been limited as the proposed use was for a function hall that would include weddings.

·         The number of guests attending the venue could not be controlled.

·         A Travel Plan had been submitted by the applicant.

·         The objection regarding parking submitted by the Council’s Highways Department had been withdrawn, however, Members could request that a resident parking scheme be considered and included on the application on approval.

·         Building Control and Fire Regulations covered the number of people permitted on the premises.

 

Objectors were present at the meeting and made the following comments:

 

·         Dick Lane was wide close to the access point, however, it was narrower at the Dudley Hill and Thornbury ends.

·         Local people parked in the area.

·         A great deal of traffic would collect in the area.

·         The pedestrian crossing nearby was not well lit.

·         An increase in traffic flow could cause issues.

·         The volume of traffic using the road had increased year on year.

·         Local residents were concerned that the venue would exacerbate the problems.

·         Only six electric car charging points would be provided, but more would be required.

·         Dick Lane was used by heavy transport as it was a main link to the motorway.

 

In response to some of the points made the Assistant Director - Planning, Transportation and Highways confirmed that:

 

·         The number of electric charging points was based upon current trends and the Council’s Environmental Health Unit had based the requirement on current usage.  There would be a greater need if the electric vehicle demand increased and it would be the applicant’s responsibility to provide further charging points.

·         The Management Plan would have to specify incentives in relation to the Travel Plan.

·         The width of Dick Lane was not a problem and officers were satisfied with the proposed parking provision, however, the issues regarding the pedestrian crossing were accepted.

 

Members then posed further questions and it was reported that:

 

·         Any additional traffic due to the venue had to be balanced against the current traffic use of Dick Lane and an additional 300 vehicles compared to the overall capacity of the road would be negligible.

·         The applicant could only be burdened with the cost of any infrastructure and was not responsible for any existing problems.

·         It was anticipated that a large number of people would attend the venue by car and as the proposed parking provision was sufficient, it would be difficult to suggest that pedestrians would need to cross the road.  The proposal would have to demonstrate a strain on the road.

·         The entrance complied with the Council’s visibility requirements.

 

The applicant’s representative was present at the meeting and commented that:

 

·         His grandparents had opened the Sweet Centre restaurant on Dick Lane.

·         The family wanted to develop the business.

·         The function hall would primarily be used as a wedding venue.

·         Planning officers had been consulted.

·         The building had been re-located away from residential properties; the rear access would be blocked; parking spaces and adequate visibility splays at the access would be provided.

·         The proposal would improve business in Bradford and had been welcomed.

·         It was hoped that the Committee could see the positives of the proposal.

·         The maximum number of parking spaces would be provided.

·         The garden area to the front of the building could be used for parking.

·         Staff had used the bus provided in the past and cycle bays would be provided.

·         The timings of the venue would not interact with school times.

·         The wedding season occurred in school holidays.

 

Members then questioned the applicant’s representative and were informed that:

 

·         The booking contract would make it clear that fireworks would not be permitted on the site and a breach would result in the loss of the deposit.  This stance would be reinforced during the process leading up to the event.  Attendants would be employed to patrol the car park and stop fireworks from being set alight along with signs stating that they were not allowed.  As many Management Plans as possible would be put place to in order to control the venue.  

·         It was accepted that the use of fireworks would be difficult to stop, however, the aim was to create an elegant venue and many facilities did not permit the use of fireworks now.  They operated another venue and only two noise complaints had been received, which indicated that their Management Plans were effective.  His family had been running wedding events for many years and traditionally fireworks were lit when the groom arrived, however, they would be banned at the venue.

·         The opening hours requested would provide flexibility for the type of events that could be held at the venue and it would enable preparation time prior to an event.

·         Approximately 4 to 5 attendants would be required to manage the car park.

·         Guests would start to arrive around 10.30am, the main event would take place between 12pm and 1pm and conclude by 10.30pm.  Only staff would be present in the premises after 10.30pm and they would be taken home on the staff bus.

·         The use of work experience placements would be considered.

 

The Assistant Director - Planning, Transportation and Highways added that the hours of use could be restricted by a condition and if the premise was granted a class D2 use it could change to a restaurant or café without planning permission. 

 

During the discussion a Member stated that he was impressed by the applicant’s presentation and application.  It was agreed that the proposal would be a good use of the land and the roads in the vicinity could cope with the potential traffic, however, it was proposed that the hours of operation be amended and a condition requiring a TRO be placed on the scheme.  Other Members echoed these sentiments.   

 

Resolved –

 

That the application be approved for the reasons and subject to the conditions set out in the Assistant Director - Planning, Transportation and Highways’ technical report and subject to the following:

 

(i)         That condition 28 be amended as follows:

 

“Unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority, the use of the premises shall be restricted to the hours of 10.00 – 00.00 Monday to Sunday.”

 

(ii) That the following additional conditions be added to the application:

 

30. Parking Review Study

 

Within 12 months of the development hereby permitted becoming operational, a timetable for the implementation of a Parking Review Study shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The Review Study shall examine the impact of the development on the overflow parking within the local area and identify any mitigation measures that may be required. Any mitigation measures identified in the approved Review Study shall then be carried out in full accordance with the agreed timetable and at the expense of the Developer.

 

Reason: In the interests of highway safety and to accord with Policies DS4 and DS5 of the Local Plan for Bradford.

 

31. Traffic Regulation Order

 

A drawing indicating the extent and full details of a Traffic Regulation Order for parking restrictions on Dick Lane in the vicinity of the site access/egress shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority prior to construction of the development continuing above damp proof course. No part of the development hereby approved shall be brought into use until best endeavours to implement the Traffic Regulation Order have been undertaken by the Highway Authority with all costs borne by the applicant.

 

Reason: In order to ensure that a safe access is maintained and to mitigate vehicular movements in the interest of highway safety and to accord with Policies TR2 and DS4 of the Core Strategy Development Plan Document and the National Planning Policy Framework.

 

ACTION: Assistant Director - Planning, Transportation and Highways