74/74a Princes Avenue, Kingston Upon Hull, HU5 3QJ
1) Change of use of property from shop at ground floor and flat at first and second floors to restaurant
at ground, first and second floors.
2) External alterations to front and rear elevations.
3) Formation of outside dining area to rear.
Brimbles Bistros Ltd
- 1. Change of use of property from shop at ground floor and flat at first and second floors to
restaurant at ground, first and second floors
2. External alterations to front and rear elevations
- Objections received
- Recommended for refusal
This application was deferred for a site visit at the October Committee.
Two storey mid-terraced property with accommodation in the roof located on the eastern side of
Princes Avenue. The property is currently vacant. It was last in use in 2001 with a retail use on the
ground floor and a flat above on the first and second floors.
The neighbouring property to the north comprises a hairdressers at ground floor and a flat at first and
second floors above. To the south, the neighbouring property comprises a butchers at ground floor
with a flat at the first and second floors above. Other properties within the terrace include an off-
licence and an office providing financial and professional services, located at each end of the terrace
respectively. To the rear of the site are residential properties which front onto Park Grove.
The site is located within the Princes Avenue shopping centre and within the Princes Avenue
The application seeks consent for the change of use of the property from a shop at ground floor and
flat at first and second floors to a restaurant at ground, first and second floors. The proposal also
includes external alterations to the front and rear of the property. To the front of the property this
consists of the removal of the ground floor frontage comprising cantilevered bay window and entrance
doors and its replacement with a flat fronted projecting façade with sliding shutter doors. To the rear,
the alterations comprise the blocking up of some openings and installation of new openings.
The original plans submitted with the application also showed folding doors installed in the front
dormer windows creating a balcony area at the second floor and an outside dining area at ground floor
to the rear of the property. Following objections received to the plans from a number of neighbouring
properties, amended plans have been received which see both elements removed from the scheme and
simply new windows installed in the front dormers to replace the existing. Following comments from
the Avenues and Pearson Park Residents Association (APPRA), the amended plans also clarify the
proposed changes to the ground floor frontage, which remain largely as set out above, apart from the
addition of a new entrance door and new railings around the front entrance on the forecourt, which are
intended to better define the entrance.
- Highways – no objection subject to conditions
- Environmental Health – recommend conditions
- Access Officer:
- concerns over the proposed frontage when all of the doors are not open. How will anyone with
a visual impairment actually locate the entrance door?
- The entrance door is not large enough. It needs to provide a minimum clear opening width of
1000mm through any one leaf. The proposal appears to be about 700mm for one leaf which is
- Details are required of the access into the premises including how the frame for the shopfront
will be overcome without leaving a step.
- Environmental Health usually require a wheelchair accessible WC for customers. The one
indicated on the plan is for staff. Even if it was for customers, as designed it would not work
• Avenues and Pearson Park Residents Association (APPRA) – not opposed in principle, as some
use of property is welcomed by the community. However, have some criticisms of the proposal:
1. the neighbours are opposed to the outside dining area as will be an erosion of privacy of the nearby
residents. This shop is situated in the part of Princes Avenue which is less commercial than the stretch
nearer Spring Bank and is surrounded by flats and houses in domestic occupation, especially in the
streets behind. We oppose the extension of the dining area into the rear.
2. the drawings are inadequate. Not possible to tell from the drawing of the proposed front elevation ,
what the ground floor entrance would look like and the balcony appended to the front dormers appears
problematic. It is important that the façade enhances the Conservation Area.
• 3 letters of objection from nos. 72, 72A and 76/76A Princes Avenue objecting on the following
- additional noise and disturbance to residents of neighbouring flats from additional activity
within the premises and from outside the property from the outdoor dining area which is adjacent to
bedrooms of adjacent flats
- noise and disturbance from additional traffic and slamming of car doors
- additional smells affecting residents in adjacent flats
- will restrict access to rear of property for delivering goods to adjacent business premises due to
use of rear of site for outside dining area and additional parking
- hygiene/vermin problems due to use of outside to rear as dining area
- increase traffic congestion in the area, Already a lack of car parking to serve existing
residential and commercial premises
• A proposed new entrance door has been added which does appear to provide a suitable clear
• The internal lobby is not large enough to provide wheelchair access.
• The proposed entrance door is not clearly visible against the front elevation
• It may be possible to demonstrate with the available literature, in an access statement, that
concertina doors can produce a 1000mm effective opening width as one leaf is slid back and that the
strength needed to push the door back does not exceed 20N
• The lobby on the approach to the wheelchair accessible WC will make it virtually impossible
for wheelchair users to access the proposed facility. The lobby door needs to be omitted from the
Letter of objection from 76/76a Princes Avenue - objecting on grounds that plans still include use of
first and second floors as part of restaurant and that late night use of these floors create problems of
noise and smells to adjacent flat at no. 76A Princes Avenue. Also the proposal would result in noise
from slamming of car doors until the early hours.
Letter of objection from 72/72a Princes Avenue - objecting to outside dining area to rear.
Letter from APPRA - Princes Avenue more than well served by 'leisure provision' but welcome
proposal as found an appropriate use for an empty property. Pleased to see proposed balcony across
front dormer deleted. Still have reservations about outside dining area to rear.
Letter of support from owner of property - property has been vacant for approx. 12 years although flat
above shop was let up until 2003. In need of much renovation. Have tried to re-let the whole premises
during this time and were approached by some businesses who were unable to take on the major repair
work needed in setting up and did not have confidence that there was sufficient catchment for a retail
outlet at this end of the avenue.
Environmental Health - recommend conditions
Design and Access Statement submitted with the application setting out the following:
• The property was previously used as a shop and flat and has lain empty for 6 years or so and
during this time has fallen into disrepair
• The ground floor front elevation is boarded up and the bay window and fascia suffers from rot
• The proposal is for a restaurant only intended for good food and attracting all ages an
particularly family groups
• The front ground floor comprises the main dining area with a small bar. The rear extensions
house a reception area, disabled WC and kitchen/preparation area. The first floor again is to be used as
a secondary dining area and the second floor is intended as a dining area particularly for functions or
family parties. There would also be a small prep/servery area and bar to the rear of the function room.
All functions are to an agreed menu and all food pre-prepared and taken to the preparation are on the
top floor prior to any function thus negating the need for a dumb waiter from the main kitchen area
• A noise report is being carried out by Environmental Noise Solutions and this will be
forwarded to you shortly. The applicants stress that their preference is to stop noise from neighbouring
properties coming into the development rather than concerns of nose emanating from the application
site. The noise report will confirm recommendations for a sound insulation scheme
• There is an existing fire escape from the second floor area and this would be retained.
• The bay window to the ground floor front elevation would be reconstructed and designed so
that the central area of the bay would have opening shutters very much in a French ‘bistro’ style. We
understand that the existing bay window is not the original bay window and its current condition
detracts from the property and devalues the surrounding properties
• The window openings to the rear extension in the main remain unchanged with all 3existing
windows and new windows being replaced in timber
• This proposal would improve the appearance of the terrace of buildings in which it is located,
compliment the existing restaurants already established in this quarter of Princes Avenue and
contribute significantly to the character of the Princes Avenue Conservation Area
• All issues relating to potential noise would be carried out in accordance with the current
• The alterations to the property allow a level threshold approach to the main entrance and
disabled toilet accommodation at ground floor level
• The stairs to the upper floors would be designed to be ambulant disabled and all stair nosings
and ironmongery would be coloured for partially sighted persons
• Servicing and deliveries to the site would be from the rear entrance to the property off Park
Regional Spatial Strategy
No relevant policies.
Joint Structure Plan (adopted July 2005)
DS1 - Hull and adjoining settlements as sub-regional development focus.
SP5 - High standard of design in development proposals.
ENV6 - Protect and enhance the setting, character or appearance of strategic built and historic assets.
Local Plan -
G2 - Allow development subject to location and detailed considerations being acceptable.
G4 - Compatible with predominant land use.
BE1 - Seek high standards of design.
BE5 - Allow appropriate extensions or alterations.
BE10 - Access for the impaired.
BE11 - (a) Good standard of shop front design,
(b) Avoid solid external shutters.
BE18 - Have special regard to Conservation Areas.
BE19 - Allow C.A. development if it preserves or enhances.
M23 - Encourage cycle parking facilities.
M29 - (a) Development allowed if access, servicing and parking satisfactory.
(b) Traffic generation and road safety must be acceptable.
M30 - Development outside City Centre to meet parking standards in table M1.
S1 - Shopping development allowed subject to details.
S2 - Existing shopping centres supported.
S12 - Food and drink development in shopping centres allowed subject to considerations. Outside
shopping centres, conditioned to prevent use as shops.
SPG Note 8 - designing access to a building or its surroundings.
Supplementary Planning Guidance 9 - 'Designing a Shop Front'
Impact on the function of the existing shopping area
Policy S12 of the Local Plan seeks to direct food and drink uses to shopping centres provided that this
does not undermine the shopping function of the centre. Princes Avenue is an Important Local
Shopping Centre, identified in the Plan as providing mainly convenience shopping, and some financial
and professional services and food and drink outlets.
Policy S2 supports the role of existing shopping centres. While this can include food and drink uses it
is important that their primary role as shopping centres is not undermined and that a balance is
maintained between the different uses.
At present, approximately 34 % of units within the defined shopping centre fall within the 3 new use
classes which cover food and drink uses ie Class A3 restaurants, Class A4 drinking establishments and
Class A5 hot food takeaways. This would increase to 36% if this application were to be approved.
The balance of uses within the shopping centre is now being lost and it is considered that the addition
of further food and drink establishments would undermine the function of the centre by creating an
imbalance between daytime and night time uses.
Moreover, the proposal would introduce a food and drink use into a terrace where there are no such
uses at present and which does have a strong retail presence, with an off-licence, hairdressers and
butchers in the neighbouring properties, which should be strengthened.
The proposal also includes the use of the first and second floors of the property. Whilst this use would
not result in the loss of any further retail units, the use of the first floors as an A3 use would lead to a
further intensification of food and drink establishments within the shopping centre. The character of
upper floors within the shopping centre is predominantly that of either living accommodation or
storage. The use of the first and second floors as an A3 use is therefore not characteristic of other
upper floor uses within the area and would set an undesirable precedent of the use of upper floors for
food and drink uses.
The unit has been vacant for some time and re-use would potentially be beneficial to the shopping area
(and to the character and appearance of the Conservation Area). However, no evidence has been
provided to suggest that the retail unit would not be attractive to a retail user, bringing it back into use
for a use more compatible with the shopping function of the centre.
The appearance of the conservation area would potentially be enhanced by bringing the vacant unit
back into use. However the harm to the shopping function of the shopping centre is considered to
outweigh the potential benefits to the conservation area.
Impact on residential amenity
This particular terrace of properties, in which the application site is located, is predominantly in retail
uses at the ground floor with the upper floors in residential use. The retail uses may generate some
noise, but this will be predominantly during the daytime and in the evening the levels of activity and
general noise and disturbance in the immediate area will be lower. it is also located at the ‘quieter’ end
of the shopping centre away from the majority of the existing shopping and related uses, particularly
the food and drink premises, which generate large numbers of visitors, particularly in the evenings.
In order to overcome some of the concerns from neighbouring properties, the outside dining area to the
rear of the property and the second floor balcony at the front has been deleted from the scheme.
Conditions could be placed on any permission to ensure that these areas are not used for this purpose at
any time in the future. However, it is considered that the introduction of a restaurant in this location
would result in greater levels of activity than is currently experienced, particularly late at night, which
would result in an increase in the noise and disturbance in the surrounding area and which it is
considered would have a materially detrimental impact on the amenities of the existing neighbouring
properties. This would be exacerbated by the fact that the proposed use would be over the full 3 floors
of the building, which would mean that there would be dining areas in the restaurant adjacent to
living/bedrooms in the adjacent flats. Also the proposed alterations to the ground floor frontage which
comprise of the installation of folding shutter doors, would, when open, result in an increase in noise
and disturbance in the surrounding area which it is considered would result in material harm to the
amenity of those adjacent residential properties.
Although the applicants have stated that the addition of the railings on the front forecourt is only
intended to better define the front entrance, and that this area would not be used as an outdoor seating
area, it could be used for this purpose without requiring planning permission. Due to the design of the
shop front, and the enclosure of the forecourt with railings, it is likely that people would spill out into
this area, resulting in further noise and disturbance in the surrounding area. Should the design of the
shop front be different and result in the premises being enclosed, then the use of the forecourt area for
a limited umber of tables and chairs may be acceptable without having a detrimental impact on the
residential amenities of neighbouring residential properties.
Some neighbouring properties have objected to the proposal on the grounds of smells from the
proposed restaurant premises and possible hygiene/vermin problems from the rear outdoor seating
area. The rear outdoor seating area has now been deleted from the proposal. In terms of the issue of
smells/odours, the installation of appropriate flues/ventilation should ensure that this is controlled and
does have an adverse impact on neighbouring residential properties.
Impact on character and appearance of Conservation Area
The proposal includes external alterations to the front and rear of the property. To the front of the
property this consists of the removal of the ground floor frontage comprising cantilevered bay window
and entrance doors and its replacement with a flat fronted projecting façade with sliding shutter doors.
It is considered that the proposed design is poorly related to the building and its surroundings and
would result in the loss of a distinctive, well balanced traditional shop front that relates well to the
building, to its neighbour (no. 72) with its ground and first floor angled bay windows and to the
Conservation Area. In particular the existing angled bays of no. 74 and no. 72 create a light attractive
rhythm and do not overdominate the buildings or the streetscape. This cannot be said of the proposed
design, which is similar in character to no. 68-70 and no. 76, all of which are over-dominant and out of
character to Local Plan Policy BE1 and BE11 and guidance contained within SPG note 9 Designing a
In order to overcome previous concerns with the proposal, the amended plans now show railings
located at the front of the building to enclose the forecourt area and provide a clearer indication of the
main entrance. There is no objection in principle to this. However, no details have been provided of
their design and appearance. However, this could be conditioned to ensure that they are in keeping
with the special character and appearance of the Conservation Area.
Other alterations on the front elevation include the replacement of the existing windows within the
dormer with new windows. There is no objection to this in principle, subject to further details on the
method of opening. This could be dealt with by condition.
The alterations to the rear comprise the blocking up of some openings and installation of new
openings. Again, there is no objection in principle to this, subject to the new brickwork matching as
close as possible to the existing brickwork. There is potential for reuse of some old brickwork from
the new openings. Details would also be required on the type and location of any flue extraction
equipment to ensure that its design and location was acceptable. This could be dealt with by condition.
Parking and Highway Safety
There would be no off street parking associated with the proposed use. As a restaurant becomes
established and builds up a good reputation, it is likely to attract people from a wide area who will
come just to eat there, more so than with an A4 (pub) use and in doing so are more likely to come by
car. Whilst it is common for many other uses within the centre to not provide off-street parking
facilities, as the number of drinking and eating establishments have increased considerably along
Princes Avenue in the last couple of years, the resultant traffic activities have caused road safety
concerns as well as increasing peak demand for parking in the evening when the demand is already
high in the adjoining residential streets. It is considered that further drinking and eating establishments
would further increase this demand. Moreover, there would be likely to be levels of noise and
disturbance to residents associated with the late night return of customers to their cars, to the detriment
of residential amenity.
The Access Officer raised a number of concerns with the original plans submitted. The amended plans
have overcome some of these. For example, a proposed new entrance door has been added with a
suitable clear opening width and the plans now show how level access into the premises would be
provided. However, the Access Officer still has some concerns with the amended plans. The
proposed entrance door is still not clearly visible against the front elevation and it is not clear that the
sliding doors can produce a 1000mm effective opening width as one leaf is slid back and that the
strength needed to push the door back does not exceed 20N. There are also some concerns with the
internal layout of the premises. The internal lobby is not large enough, in terms of its depth, to provide
wheelchair access and the lobby on the approach to the wheelchair accessible WC would make it
virtually impossible for wheelchair users to access the proposed facility.
Recommend Refusal for the following reason(s): -
1 The proposed use would lead to an over proliferation of food and drink establishments within
the Princes Avenue shopping centre leading to the undermining of its shopping function and to its
vitality and viability contrary to policies S1, S2 and S12 of the Local Plan
2 The proposed use would result in increased demand for on-street parking spaces in nearby
residential streets which would result in competition with residents for parking spaces and creating
disturbance late in the evening, to the detriment of residential amenity and contrary to policy S1 of the
3 The proposed use at first and second floor level and the proposed design of the shop front at
ground floor level would result in disturbance to occupiers of neighbouring residential properties, to
the detriment of residential amenity and contrary to policy S1 of the Local Plan.
4 The proposed shop front by virtue of its design and lack of sufficient traditional detail relates
poorly to the building and its surroundings and would adversely affect the appearance of this
traditional building and the contribution that it makes to the special character and appearance of the
Conservation Area, contrary to policies BE1, BE11, BE18 and BE19 of the Local Plan, policies SP5
and ENV6 of the Joint Structure Plan and guidance contained in SPG Note 9 Designing a Shop Front
5 It has not been demonstrated that the proposed shop front would provide equitable access for
all members of the community contrary to policies BE1 and BE10 of the Local Plan