Agenda item


To make observations on new applications received.


Resolved:       That the following observations be made on the applications:


Jolly Potters Inn, 9 Barracks Road, Newcastle  23/00184/FUL


The Working Party did not object to the demolition of the existing building given the well-executed heritage statement which analyses the value of the former pub.  They also did not object in principle to the replacement building as privately rented flats. They did however object to the 5 storey building which is too large, given the context of this part of the town centre which even on the ring road, at this section is moving away from larger scale buildings to lower rise buildings and two-storey terraces.  It was considered at least one storey too high.


The Working Party strongly objected to the pastiche use of mill chic which was considered totally inappropriate for the town and looks imported, despite the good intentions at better design.  The proportions of the windows are too large and Juliette balconies are not desirable given the proximity to the ring road.  It looks like an island site and has no contextual connection with its surroundings. There was some concern over the small size of the apartments. They were happy with brick as the material but this needs to tie in more with the school and other buildings close by. They also questioned the likely success of a retail unit in this location despite welcome the attempt at an active frontage. The Working Party also dislike the garage access with its horizontal emphasis and gaping hole in the side of the building given how visible this will be. 


Overall it was felt that the design needed amending, the scale reducing and that it did not positively contribute to the character of the conservation area.


Land North of Mucklestone Wood Lane, Loggerheads  23/00002/OUT


The Working Party felt that the scheme was an improvement on the previous one and that the chosen vernacular of the estate was not unattractive but it would still have a big impact on the landscape and be a sharp contrast to the existing use of agricultural land. The natural barrier with the hedge is much better but the landscape is still relatively open and exposed and the barrier is not very dense. The rural approach does not go far enough and should have less obtrusive design, maybe mono-pitched roofs, possibly use of stone.  It is still very suburban. The scheme gives consideration to the setting of the heritage asset and views from it, but more should be given to the views towards the asset. There was some concern over the pollution caused to the environment by the development including light pollution.


Sneyd Arms, The Village, Keele  23/00526/ADV


The Working Party objected to the floodlighting proposed on the building as unnecessary given that the pub is not on the main road (bypass) attracting passers-by.  They felt that the scheme was not particularly sympathetic and overdone in terms of the quantity and style of the signs, including objecting to the new typeface.  They wanted to remove the side gable signage and not have any floodlighting.

Supporting documents: