To:PLANNING COMMITTEEAuthor:Dave Parkin
LEGAL AND DEMOCRATIC SERVICES
Date:6 MAY 2005 Int. 200 7220
3 THE ARCADE, TYNEMOUTH - PLANNING APPLICATION - SITE VISIT (TYNEMOUTH WARD)
Executive Summary
This report gives details of a site visit in respect of a planning application for a change of use of Off Licence to Public House to extend building south to form an extension to remaining Furry Pear Public House. Internal alterations at ground floor and internal alterations to first floor to form WC’s/storage and offices and external alterations to east elevation of 3 The Arcade, Tynemouth.
Recommendation
That the application be determined taking into account the report of the Head of Environment and any observations of Members who took part in the site visit.
Information
At the meeting of the Committee held on 28 April 2005, consideration was given to a planning application for a change of use of Off Licence to Public House to extend building south to form an extension to remaining Furry Pear Public House. Internal alterations at ground floor and internal alterations to first floor to form WC’s/storage and offices and external alterations to east elevation of 3 The Arcade, Tynemouth.
.
A copy of the original plan list report of the Head of Environment is attached as an appendix to this report.
The Committee deferred consideration of the application pending a site visit by the Chair, Deputy Chair, Minority Party Spokespersons and Local Ward Councillors. The site visit took place on 17 May 2005 and those Members who took part in the site visit will report verbally to the meeting.
Background Information
The following documents have been used in compilation of this report. They may be inspected at the office of the author, other than those indicated as confidential (C); exempt (E); or published material, eg books, articles, plans (P).
1.Minutes of Planning Committee of 28 April 2005 (P).
2.Report of Planning Officer on planning application 05/00032/FUL submitted to Planning Committee on 28 April 2005 (P).
Item No:Application No: / 05/00032/FUL / Author / Haley Holton
Date received: / 6 January 2005 / 0191 2192564
Target decision date: / 3 march 2005 / Ward / Tynemouth
Application type: full planning application
Location:
3 The Arcade And Building South Of Tynemouth North Shields Tyne And Wear NE30 4BS
Proposal:
Change of use of Off License to Public House to extend building south of to form an extension to remaining Furry Pear Public House. Internal alterations at ground floor and internal alterations to first floor (above remaining Furry Pear PH) to form W.Cs/storage and offices. External alterations to east elevation fronting The Arcade (Revised Description).
Applicant:
Chris Barnes, Wellington Chambers 61 Saville Street North Shields Tyne And Wear
Agent:
Ian Belsham Associates, Keel Row 3 The Watermark Metro Riverside Gateshead NE11 9SZ
RECOMMENDATION:Application Permitted
INFORMATION
This application was considered at the meeting of 28th April 2005 where it was deferred for a site visit. The report has been amended to incorporate the addendum at the last meeting with the changes highlighted in bold.
Government Policy
PPS1 Delivering Sustainable Development
PPG15 Planning and the Historic Environment
Development Plan
Regional Planning Guidance for the North East (RPG1)
North Tyneside Council Unitary Development Plan 2002
Consultations/representations
Internal Consultees
Conservation Officer
In considering the appropriateness of a proposal within a conservation area there are four tests, which must be applied, by asking four questions. There are three answers, which can result from each test. This test derives from the South Lakeland District v Sec. Of State case and Carlisle Diocesan Patronage board case (JPL, 1991, 654) and the wording of Section 72 of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990. The four tests are:
- Does the proposal preserve the character of the conservation area?
- Does the proposal enhance the character of the conservation area?
- Does the proposal preserve the appearance of the conservation area?
- Does the proposal enhance the appearance of the conservation area?
There are three answers, which can be given to each of these questions; yes, no, or neutral. It is the overall picture provided by these answers which will guide the judgement on the effect of the proposal on the conservation area.
In terms of the definition of the character of the Tynemouth Village Conservation Area this is well documented in the character statement, which was adopted as SPG in August 2003. The document makes specific reference to pubs and bars on page 15 where consideration should be given to preventing an excess of too many drinking premises. page 19 makes further reference to this issue where it advises that the changes to these premises should not be allowed to adversely affect the character of the Village. As I understand it, the change of use of the former off- licence, which has been vacant for more than 12 months, is to facilitate the switching of the existing pub use within the Furry Pear fronting onto Bath Terrace, to relocate to the commercial core of Front Street. The former floor space fronting onto Bath Terrace is currently being converted to residential use in accordance with the planning permission previously granted. The net total floorspace for the A3 use needs to be considered. If it entails a considerable increase then this is likely to be considered contrary to the TVCS. A small or no total increase is unlikely to adversely affect the character of the village and therefore the use in this instance would be considered acceptable.
The proposal to amend the front access to the property from Front Street is of concern. The existing shopfront is well proportioned with some fine corbelling detail and splayed recess entrance door. The proposal seeks to square this entrance detail off and the addition of two centrally positioned glazing panels to continue the glazing across the frontage. The detailing, modelling and decoration of older shopfronts is particularly valuable in townscape terms and should be retained. I consider this element of change is unacceptable, as it would erode the quality of one of the best examples of a surviving shop front detail in the village. As a consequence it would fail to preserve or enhance the character and appearance of the conservation area and thus prove contrary to the statutory duty, PPG15, UDP policy and guidance contained within the Tynemouth Village Character Statement.
Should the applicant amend the detail, and the application is recommended for approval, then I consider that planning conditions should be imposed controlling advertisements to the property and for the materials to be used on the alterations to elevation to the Arcade.
Historic Buildings Officer for Tyne and Wear
Friday 18th February by chance the owner met us in Front Street and discussed the proposals he had for the Furry Pear and to the former Booze Buster shop ...he also explained the woks he was carrying out to the former Royal Sovereign in making it into a home for himself and family...(this was perhaps mainly to "put you in the picture") ...the main issue that I know Graham Sword is concerned with is his proposal to widen the existing splayed shop entrance doorway at the former Booze Buster shop.
The owner put forward his views that he is doing so much to improve the general condition of these buildings and later went on to show us around the former Rawlpindi Restaurant (that hasn't been put forward for Planning Approval yet) where the street frontage on to Front Street will be improved i.e. new slate roof to the Rawlpindi the link building and to the former kitchen block over Booze Buster, removal of 1960's box canopy and improvements to Bertie’s Bar. He said that he was doing so much that he thought the alteration to the splay shop front entrance was a small item for negotiation and that this was to give easy access for disabled persons ... there are two steps which are to be retained so there is still the access problem. I suspected that the reason for widening the entrance could be a fire escape reason i.e. the width of the doorway will determine the numbers allowed in the premises
Friday 25th February the owner met us again by chance, this time Graham was present, we discussed the issue of the splayed shop front and said we could not support the alteration to the entrance, the owner accepted this however subject to any fire officers requirements.
We will need amended plans. We did talk about works to the former Berties Bar, Graham said he had a photograph that showed the first floor oriel window being original or at least historic. This photograph would be useful to inform us what Berties frontage was once like. I would be interested to see this too. I suggest that a copy of the photograph is perhaps sent to the owner and to the Agent.
Head of Environment (Health and Protection)
I have concerns regarding the potential noise from the public house both from plant via chiller units and ventilation systems and also noise breakout from entertainment. I also have concerns regarding noise from the increased potential noise arising from public via the increased use of the arcade increasing the disturbance to residents. I would also be concerned about fugitive odours arising from refuse or potential cooking on the premises. If planning permission is given I would request the following conditions.
Non- Standard Conditions
1) The rear yard must not be used as a beer garden.
Reason: to prevent disturbance to the residential premises to the rear of the premises.
2) Background music only is permitted within the public house. No entertainment noise is permitted such as disco or live bands.
Reason : To prevent disturbance via noise breakout. Background music is played at much lower level than if the public house has live bands or discos.
Standard Conditions
1) HOU02 : No activities between the hours of 20;00 hours and 08:00 hours in the rear yard .
Reason To protect amenity.
2) HOU04: Restrict Hours: No Construction: Re: All alteration works carried out in connection with the proposal: 08:00 to 18:00 Monday to Friday and 08:00 to 12:00 Saturdays.
3) NOI03: Noise: Sound Insulation-Buildings - Comment: To comply with the requirements of this condition it is requested the applicant submit details of the construction and sound insulation measures to be installed. This information must also include the specified acoustic performance of construction measures to be carried out. There are sound reduction indices available for different types and forms of construction. It is recommended the applicant use an acoustic consultant to establish an acceptable insulation scheme.
4) NOI02;
5) NOI04 - Comment: Scheme should include a noise survey in accordance with B.S 4142:1997 To establish the background noise level at closest residential premises to allow an assessment of the noise attenuation required for any specific plant or equipment.
6) NOI11 insert 45dB
7) REF02
8) EPL02
9) EPL03
10) EPL04
Manager of Highways and Transportation
Recommendation - Approval
No objections in principle to this proposal, as there is a net reduction in the parking requirement for this application than the parking required by the original use of the building. An application was received in 2004 for the subdivision of the basement and ground floor and upper floor dwelling. This proposal resulted in a reduction in the parking requirement of 9 spaces. Whilst the current application requires an increase in parking provision from that of the previous proposal of 3 spaces, it is still less than that of the original use and it would be unreasonable to require the applicant to provide additional parking in this instance. The parking requirements are theoretical, as the building has no parking within the site but these requirements can be summarised below:
Parking standards:
A1 Retail:1 space per 50m2 of floor area.
A3 Food & Drink:1 space per 10m2 of public floor area.
C3 Dwellings:1 space per dwelling plus 1 space per 3 dwellings for visitors.
Original Use:
A1 Retail:100m2=2 spaces
A3 Food & Drink:190m2=19 spaces
C3 Dwellings:1No.=1 space
TOTAL:=22 spaces
Phase I Use (Planning Ref. 04/02367/FUL):
A1 Retail:100m2=2 spaces
A3 Food & Drink:70m2=7 spaces
C3 Dwellings:3No.=4 space
TOTAL:=13 spaces
Phase II Use (current application):
A1 Retail:0=0 spaces
A3 Food & Drink:120m2=12 spaces
C3 Dwellings:3No.=4 space
TOTAL:=16 spaces
Representations
Thirteen letters of objection have been received including a further eight letters, which were distributed by the Tynemouth Village Association. The grounds for objection can be summarised as follows.
-There are already too many pubs in Tynemouth
-The proposal is unacceptable as it will create more problems for residents
-The proposal would add to the already excessive noise, revelling and anti social behaviour
-Another public house can only add problems associated with drunkenness, litter, nuisance and constant stream of taxis
-The area reached saturation some time ago and is now a centre for binge drinking
-Users of the Pubs spill out onto the street blocking the pavement
-The extra pub would result in downgrading the area and would negate some of the excellent work already done by the Council to improve the ambience of Tynemouth
-Booze Buster frontage is one of the few original and unspoiled shops left
-A balance is needed more retail outlets required not less
-Given that the village is a Conservation Area alterations of this type is not in keeping with the history of the Village and is wholly inappropriate
-Another Public House would affect the vitality and viability of the street
-Proposal detrimental to Tynemouth Village centre visually, economically and socially
-External alterations are not in keeping with Tynemouth Village Character Statement
External Consultees
Tynemouth Village Association
We object to any proposal to alter the shop front, as it is one of the oldest original shops on the street. The Village Design Statement clearly says that original shop fronts should be preserved. The work and public consultation which went into the document will have been wasted if its use as a supplementary planning document in not being observed.
We would most certainly object to this building being changed into a Public House with an exit/entrance on Front Street. We support those residents in their objections who already suffer from noise and nuisance from people going to and leaving from the existing licensed premises, and who now fear even more noise. To create an entrance to another Public House onto Front Street, practically below resident’s windows is unacceptable. It may be argued that a new pub is not being created, and that it is a new entrance to an existing pub. What is clear is that there will be a new pub entrance on residential Front Street.
Because of new applications for public entertainment licenses for pubs on Front Street, the quality of life for residents can only deteriorate further, without the prospect of another pub entrance being proposed for Front Street. Residents are also concerned about the effect on the character of the Village, especially as so much has been done via the restoration scheme.
Northumberland and Newcastle Society
Members of the Society are greatly concerned about proposals to change the use of the above premises from an off license to a public house. The increase in the number of drinking establishments in Tynemouth over recent years is disproportionate to the requirements of residents and tourists alike, is inappropriate within the Conservation Area and threatens the character of Tynemouth Village.
Other local authorities, including NCC are seriously concerned about the concentration of pubs and clubs in relatively small, predominantly residential areas, and are actively seeking to restore an appropriate balance by restricting further licensed premises in sensitive neighbourhoods.
Tynemouth is already becoming a destination during the summer months for large parties of youngsters intent on a night of excessive drinking which often leads to unruly and anti social behaviour. Planners must consider the quality of life for the permanent residents of Tynemouth, and act before the situation becomes intolerable.
Northumbria Police
No objections to this application. Northumbria Police encourage good design through sensible routine security measures during the building of a new development or during the refurbishment of buildings and estates as this has been shown to reduce the levels of crime fear of crime and disorder.
PLANNING OFFICERS REPORT
Description of the Site
The site to which the application relates is Booze Buster Off License, an A1 retail unit situated on Front Street in Tynemouth and the Furry Pear Public House situated behind, fronting The Arcade.
Booze Buster Off Licence is situated at ground floor of a three-storey building and has a small open yard to the rear. Both the first and second floors are currently vacant above the Off License. The application site has been vacant for approximately 12months and currently has planning permission for a change of use to A2 offices, see planning history below. Adjoining the site to the west is a flat roof single storey building, which currently trades as the Deep Blue Dive Centre.