Sharps Redmore are pleased to have assisted in a successful planning decision in Suffolk, overturning a previous refusal on appeal.
The scheme involved a change of use to provide a builders workshop, offices and storage facilities. The original application was refused partly on noise grounds and Sharps Redmore were instructed to resolve these issues.
The initial application was refused on grounds of disturbance to residential amenity of nearby cottages. The Planning Inspector noted potential for disturbance and the potential to harm the living conditions of the occupiers of nearby dwellings and, and that enjoyed by the host dwelling, resulting from noisy activities associated with the proposed industrial processes, including the start-up and movement of large vehicles.
The lack of technical evidence accompanying the initial application concerning the potential noise implications of the proposal, led the Planning Inspector to conclude that the proposed development would be harmful to the living conditions of the occupiers of nearby dwellings and the host dwelling.
This resubmission application sought to address these concerns through the submission of a dedicated Noise Assessment undertaken in relation to the development as proposed. The relevant part of the planning decision notice reads;
”Compiled by Sharps Redmore, the report convincingly demonstrates that the various activities associated with the development (including, inter alia, vehicular movements of office staff, the use of a builders workshop, the loading/unloading of building materials, manoeuvring of plant/diggers and mechanical ventilation) would not serve to raise noise levels above existing ambient levels, and would otherwise be significantly below the World Health Organisation's (WHO) recommended levels for daytime noise. The report also concludes that the proposal would not introduce a different noise source over and above the existing busy main road and nearby existing uses identified. Indeed, such findings are found by the Council's Environmental Protection team to be acceptable, subject to a suitably worded planning condition restricting working hours to those set out within the application form. It is otherwise noted that the design and layout of the proposal appears to have been conceived with due regard to neighbouring amenity, given its single-storey height and decision to locate proposed open storage and workshop areas away from neighbouring properties. With the above in-mind, it is thus considered that the proposal would not serve to erode existing residential amenity to unacceptable levels from matters relating to noise disturbance, outlook, loss of light or otherwise, when judged against the provisions of DM23 (Residential amenity).”