Gerard G wrote:Thanks for the responses.
Some further information.
I am not the person hoping to open a creche.
I am planning to invest € 200k approx. into the fit out of the building - therefore without full pp it appears to be a non runner. The building previously had pp for retail and I applied for change of use to leisure.
ong you are correct in the sense that the Planners are claiming that the proposed development may lead to increased traffic volumes and therefore increased safety concerns for pedestrians. While I don't neccessarialy disagree with this reasoning I would have thought that these should be matters for the Council to address as it is not within my power to do anything about these issues, eg put in a pedestrian crossing, parking restrictions, etc.
I have already incurred substantial expense in preparing drawings, applying for change of use pp, applying for a fire cert., etc and am reluctant to take on consultants to do traffic management studies if it can be avoided.
As far as I am aware I am the first commercial venture in my local authority area to have a temporary planning condition imposed.
However, in the past week I have become aware of somebody in a neighbouring local authority area who applied for an accomodation type business having a similar condition attached to their pp. They now find themselves in a similar position to myself in that they are unable to proceed with their proposed business.
The money you have expended may be considerable to you, but going for a fire cert before you had the permission in the bag seems a little premature - and yes, I accept that your designer had to know the change of use would work and that some items covered by the fire cert would need to be included in the PP, but you get my drift.
If this temporary permission came out of the blue, I sympathise, but the other comments I made stand, perhaps now more than ever. If you don't get a first principles permission you will have a lot of "minding" to do of your patrons [you don't need any bad reports going to the local authority for bad road behaviour] and you may also require to second guess the monitoring done by the local authority - it will be all too easy for someone to mistake sole-end user trip your traffic flow incorrectly.
My experience of traffic consultants is that they can perform economically and I had to use one both times I went for a change of use from light industrial to retail warehousing in the past two years - we simply wouldn't have gotten the clean permissions we did both times without them.
Am I also right in assuming that you were in fact asked to submit traffic mobility and parking studies as part of the application and simply didn't or else used your architect to "fudge" a submission? This sometimes occurs and where clients fail to act as requested, a limited permission of refusal can be the result. If not please disregard thsi last comment.
Regardless of this, on matters outside your direct control, but which may need to be improved in the area, washing your hands of them on the basis that you cannot do them is only a means of shooting yourself on a well-exercised foot. Far better would be to agree a contribution level you can work with and hope the LA will play ball if such improvements are deemed necessary to achieving your permission - otherwise you'll be in a Catch-22 situation.