Any Thoughts On This One Above Superdrug?

April

12

5 comments

There’s a planning application for the nightclub above Superdrug. It’s actually a ‘retrospective’ application – the club is of course already there. You can find the application here.

 

It’s recommended for approval, and will be passed unless any councillor calls it in. Here’s the full report:

Application No : 13/00088/COU Zoning : Primary Shopping Frontage
Parish : Rayleigh Town Council
Ward : Wheatley
Location : First Floor 106 108 High Street Rayleigh
Proposal : Retrospective Application for Change of Use from Pool Hall (Class D2) to Night Club (Sui Generis)
NOTES

Planning permission is sought for the change in use of the first floor of a building in Rayleigh town centre. The site is within the Rayleigh Conservation
Area. The premises are above the Superdrug store located next to the junction of the High Street and Eastwood Road. There is a two storey maisonette in the attached building above the Cooperative funeral care unit. There are no other residential properties in the immediate vicinity. The application is retrospective and the change in use has already occurred.
There is a planning enforcement case, reference 12/00064/COU_C, relating to this unauthorised change in use. The premises have previously been a pool
hall with ancillary bar facilities and had been operating, as such, for a period of thirty years. A pool hall is included in Use Class D2 Assembly and Leisure,
whereas the use as a nightclub is Sui Generis (without classification).
The premises have a gross internal floorspace of 409m?, and the nightclub is open to the general public from 9pm to 2am on Fridays and Saturdays, as wellas being available for private functions. There are no alterations proposed to the exterior of the building and consequently no visual impact on the Rayleigh
Conservation Area.
The adopted vehicle standards for a nightclub are based on a maximum of one space per 50m? for vehicle parking and minimum standards for cycle,
PTW and disabled spaces. The development does not provide for any parking provision however there are ample spaces in the nearby public car parks as
well as public cycle, PTW and disabled spaces in a nearby location on the High Street. In considering the hours of use and the nature of the
development it is not considered that there is any deficiency in parking provision.
The premises are also subject to licensing controls which are subject to expiry and renewal and are actively monitored by the Council’s licensing team as
well as other agencies such as the Police. The licence controls include the hours that the business is allowed to operate as well as permitted noise
levels.
The Head of Environmental Services has recommended a condition to ensure there is adequate noise insulation for the party
wall shared with the neighbouring maisonette as well as conditions preventing amplified sounds and light shows in the open areas of the premises.
Such conditions are considered to be appropriate to protect the amenity of the occupants of neighbouring premises as well as visitors to the town centre.
Rayleigh Town Council and the Conservation Area Adviser have raised no objection to the change in use. No further responses have been received from
the statutory consultation and neighbourhood notification process.

A use of the premises as a nightclub in this central location is considered to be in accordance with the aims of Policy RTC4 which seeks to provide a
range of evening leisure uses in Rayleigh town centre. The proposal is not considered to be in
conflict with the development plan or any other material planning consideration.

Representations:
RAYLEIGH TOWN COUNCIL – No objection
ECC HISTORIC BUILDINGS/CONSERVATION AREAS – No observations
HEAD OF ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES – The Head of Environmental Services reports that if Members are minded to approve the application, the following conditions should be attached to any consent granted:
1) The internal wall(s) adjoining residential property shall be insulated against the egress of internally generated noise, in accordance with a scheme to be
submitted to and agreed in writing with the L.P.A. Such agreed works shall be fully implemented prior to the commencement of any use hereby permitted
and shall be maintained in the approved form while the premises are in use for the permitted purpose.
2) No amplified speech or music shall be broadcast on the open areas of the
premises.
3) No light or laser shows shall take place on the open areas of the premise

Any thoughts on this?

About the author, admin

  • Good questions Bruce.

    The original consent in 1983 was for a pool hall.
    In 2011 the applicants got permission to remove the condition that required it to be a pool hall.

    So where does that leave things now ?

    I will be asking for clarification from planning officers on this.

    As always , district Councillors have to stay impartial in advance of any committee meeting.

  • Are there any figures to show whether or not there has been any increase in late night crime/anti social behaviour in Rayleigh since this club opened? If there has been such an increase, which just on general chatting to people I think has happened, then I think the change of use should be opposed on that basis.

  • Christine, I can’t see any info on specifically late night crime, but here are the latest figures on crime and anti-social behaviour within a half-mile of Rayleigh Town Centre. I’ve lumped together figures for Jan and Feb for each of the last 3 years

    Jan/Feb 2013: Anti Social Behaviour: 82 Violent Crime: 26 Criminal Damage and Arson: 26 Drugs:9 Public Disorder and Weapons : 4
    Jan/Feb 2012: Anti Social Behaviour: 69 Violent Crime: 22 Criminal Damage and Arson: 23 Drugs:12 Public Disorder and Weapons : 6
    Jan/Feb 2011: Anti Social Behaviour: 54 Violent Crime: 20 Info not available for other categories

    So there seems to be an increase in anti-social behaviour but not much change in actual crime.

  • That’s quite a big jump in anti social behaviour. Of course it can’t be proved it is down to any one establishment being there now that wasn’t there say two years ago.

  • {"email":"Email address invalid","url":"Website address invalid","required":"Required field missing"}
    >