Agenda item

The Principal Planning Officer outlined the application to the Committee and highlighted that the application had been deferred by the Committee at its meeting in May to facilitate a Committee site visit that took place on 21st May.

            She reminded the Committee that the application was subsequently deferred at its meeting in June so that planning policy concerns which had been raised by Members could be considered in more detail by officers and reported back.

            She explained that officers had concerns with the issues raised and that refusal reasons on SP3 and paragraph 7.1.5 of the Plan Strategy would be unsustainable.  She stated that the proposal complied with the LDP Plan Strategy and that officers’ opinion remained unchanged, in that it was recommended that the application should be approved, subject to conditions.

She added that officers did recognise that whether the proposal would enhance the conservation area in line with SPPS and policy BH2, and whether it would impact the setting of the listed building was a matter of judgement for the Committee.

            The Chairperson welcomed Ms. D. Thompson to the meeting, who spoke in objection to the application on behalf of First Church.

            Ms. Thompson explained that her clients wished to thank the Committee for the rigorous scrutiny that had been given to the proposal at its previous meetings and that they had hoped that, based on the robust discussions, the professional recommendation might have been different.

            She stated that the proposal was the wrong development for the wrong place, in that amusement arcades were not an acceptable use in the prime retail core, approval would cause a cluster of those uses, within a small area, and that it would be a bad neighbour to the church.

            She outlined the following four areas of concern on behalf of her clients:

·        The application was for a change of use and that shop front alterations should not be considered;

·        Opening hours;

·        The impact on the conservation area; and

·        Proliferation.

She concluded by highlighting that, at a previous meeting of the Committee, the applicant had stated that the proposal was a relocation of an existing arcade within walking proximity but that there were no mitigations in place to prevent another arcade operator from moving into the applicant’s current unit and could give rise to the potential of two arcades in close proximity to the church.  She asked the Committee to refuse the application.

            The Chairperson thanked Ms. Thompson for her representation and welcomed Mr. A. Mains to the meeting who attended on behalf of the applicant.

            Mr. Mains addressed concerns which had been raised by Members of the Committee at its previous meetings with regard to the application.  He stated that concerns had been raised that adequate consideration had not been given to the site’s proximity to the Extern treatment centre, but that there was no reason to anticipate any synergy between the two, as there were other gaming centres within walking distance of the centre and there was no evidence of any harmful synergy.

            He addressed the concern regarding proliferation and stated that, to provide assurance to the Committee, the applicant was content to accept a condition that would require the closure of the North Street premises before the opening of the Rosemary Street premises.

            With regard to streetscape, he stated that the proposal consisted of a discreet low-profile shopfront in muted colours through a refurbishment of the façade which was in contrast to the surrounding area he described as a depressed part of Belfast.

            He concluded by stating that the applicant had proposed a Planning condition that would limit Sunday opening from 12pm to avoid conflict with morning worship and would mirror the opening hours of the adjacent 3Cs Social Club, he asked the Committee to approve the application as the proposal would deliver betterment within the primary retail core.

            Following discussion, the Committee granted planning permission, subject to conditions and delegated authority to the Director of Planning and Building Control to finalise the wording of the conditions and deal with any other issues that arise provided that they were not substantive.