-
Agenda item
Former Public Conveniences, Harold Place (HS/FA/21/00905)
(S Wood, Assistant Planning Manager)
Minutes:
Proposal
Development of site of former public convenience to provide a two storey pavilion for use as cafe bar & restaurant (Class E(b)), including external landscape works
Application No
HS/FA/21/00824
Conservation Area
Yes - Hastings Town Centre
Listed Building
No
Public Consultation
Yes – 28 objections, Council application on Council owned land
The Assistant Planning Manager gave updates. There are 3 additional objections raising concerns regarding the quality of the report and pre-determination as this is a Council application, being determined by the Council. Council applications are allowed, and it is the Planning Committee that determines the application not the Council itself. An objection was also raised regarding the lack of public consultation prior to the application being submitted. The Assistant Planning Manager confirmed that there is no statutory requirement for anyone to undertake pre application consultation. There were concerns raised regarding the location of the application. The Councillors were reminded that they must determine planning applications on their own merits. Concerns regarding the financing of the project and how these projects are financed are not material planning considerations and is not something we can take account of in determining this application.
Slides were shown of the location of the application site and an aerial shot. Drawings and floor plans of the ground and first floor were shown. The Assistant Planning Manager stated that the proposal is for established Town Centre use and there are no objections from Sussex Police. Condition 21 restricts the use of the premises to ensure it does not operate as a separate drinking establishment. This application should be considered on its own merits and pre application consultation is not a material consideration.
Councillor Carr as the Ward councillor addressed the Planning Committee. She stated that residents raised issues of noise, increased traffic, more take away drivers in an area already impacted, the impact on local businesses, whether building a chain restaurant using public money on a fifty year mortgage is a good use of the public money. Concerns around footfall, antisocial behaviour, the eco credentials of this building, as well as how this project works in relation to the Town Deal. The building would remove the last connection between the Town Centre and the Seafront. It is a missed opportunity to build with environmental considerations.
The National Planning Policy Framework states in paragraph 8 that a building should be well designed, beautiful and safe spaces with accessible services. This building is not fit for purpose. There is no staff rest room, no staff toilets, which is a recommendation for all food businesses in the workplace. There is no cupboard for cleaning supplies, no access to bin store and no delivery door which is a security risk. There is no way for staff to move up stairs without using the stairs. The lift does not meet the standards expected of a new building and with the expectation of staff having to carry food upstairs this means that the employer is unlikely to offer employment opportunities to anyone with any sort of mobility issue. It is not acceptable that a disabled person may have to ask for assistance to use the lift.
The Assistant Planning Manager replied. The developers have demonstrated there is a 7.5% improvement on the levels of energy efficiency required by the Building Regulations. There have been conversations with Environmental Health Officers regarding the use of the building as a restaurant and the layout. The Environmental Health Officers are satisfied with the layout. The internal layout is not a material planning consideration but down to the operator, and it is covered by alternative food and health and safety law. Environmental Heath raised no objection to the application. Regarding disabled access, this is dealt through the Building Regulations outside of the planning process. If the lift is not fit for purpose, then the building will not get Building Regulations approval.
The Councillors debated.
The Assistant Planning Manager reminded Councillors that detailed matters about the internal layout and the operation of the restaurant are covered by other sources of legislation that cannot be a reason for refusal of planning permission. For consideration is the principal of development, the use and the appearance of the building.
Councillor Bishop proposed to refuse the application, Seconded by Councillor Beaver.
RESOLVED (7 for, 1 against, 2 abstentions) Refuse planning permission due to the following
the proposed development is not considered fit for purpose in respect of its internal layout resulting in poor people and staff movement between floors and an unsuitable lift. The development is therefore contrary to paragraphs 8, 130 and 134 of the National Planning Policy Framework.
Supporting documents:
- MAP_HS_FA_21_00905_Former Public Conveniences Harold Place, item 334. PDF 377 KB
- HS-FA-21-00905 Former Public Conveniences, Harold Place, item 334. PDF 151 KB
-
My council
Contact
Contact us if you have a question about democratic services.
Content
The content on this page is the responsibility of our Democratic Services team.