Agenda item

To determine a full planning application from Friends of Tynemouth Outdoor Pool for the refurbishment, renovation and reinstatement of existing structures to create a 25 metre open-air leisure pool (heated), and splash pad, and construction of temporary changing, refreshment and toilet facilities.

The Chair is to consider several requests for speaking rights ahead of the meeting.

The Committee considered a report from the planning officers, together with two addendums, one circulated prior to the meeting and another circulated at the meeting, in relation to a full planning application from Friends of Tynemouth Pool for the refurbishment, renovation and reinstatement of existing structures to create a 25 metre open-air leisure pool (heated), and splash pad, and construction of temporary changing, refreshment and toilet facilities.

A planning officer presented details of the application with the aid of various maps, plans and photographs.

In accordance with the Committee’s Speaking Rights Scheme Mr Peter Coulson had been granted permission to speak to the Committee. Mr Coulson referred to the history of the site and support received from the Mayor of Waverley in Sydney, Australia for the restoration of the pool. He stated that the careful design of the proposed developments would enhance the character and appearance of the conservation area. An alternative design of the temporary structures had been submitted on 1 April 2023 but the planning officers had yet to respond. The proposals would not distract from the amenity and operation of neighbouring organisations and people. It was acknowledged that the biodiversity assessments were now out of date but these could be reviewed at the appropriate time in the year.

Councillors Lewis Bartoli and Sarah Day, ward councillors for the Tynemouth Ward had also been granted permission to address the Committee.

Councillor Bartoli highlighted 3 areas of concern raised by the planning officers which he believed could be satisfactorily resolved. He stated that if the biodiversity, bird and habitat assessments were updated this would satisfy the concerns regarding the absence of up to date information. Councillor Bartoli compared the impact of the temporary buildings on the character and appearance of the area with the impact of existing similar structures in the area and he contended that the harm did not outweigh the public benefits of reinstating the pool. He also challenged the view contained in the planning officers report that the proposed development was un-fundable and undeliverable and argued that if the project ultimately proved to be unviable, the Authority would inherit an asset in an improved condition.

Councillor Day referred to the history of the site, the community campaign to restore the pool and the amount of public support for the scheme. She outlined the benefits of the scheme and those aspects of the proposal which were deemed to be acceptable. She acknowledged the concerns raised by the planning officers but she believed these issues could be resolved to allow permission to be granted. This would in turn enable the applicants to seek funding to progress the ambitious scheme.

Dr Anton Lang addressed the Committee on behalf of the applicants, Friends of Tynemouth Pool, to respond to the speakers’ comments. Dr Lang accepted that the bird and ecology assessments were out of date but he emphasised that they had not raised any issues for concern. He argued that the proposed reasons for refusing permission could be translated into conditions imposed on the granting of planning permission. He commented on the design and appearance of the proposed temporary structures which could be adapted to mitigate their impact on the character and appearance of the area. He asked the Committee to give the community hope by granting permission subject to a series of conditions requiring the issues raised by officers to be satisfactorily resolved. 

Members of the Committee asked questions of the speakers and officers and made comments. In doing so the Committee gave particular consideration to:

a)      car parking and public transport links in the area surrounding the site;

b)      the difference between the estimated build costs for the development calculated by officers and the applicants;

c)       examples of outdoor swimming pools operated in other parts of the country which had proven to be financially viable;

d)      the statutory timescales for the commencement of works following the granting of planning permission;

e)      the significance of the site, the economic, health and social benefits of the proposed development and the level of public support in favour of the reinstatement of the pool;

f)        the impact of the proposed temporary structures on the character and appearance of the conservation area; and

g)      the advice from planning officers that should planning permission be granted, subject to conditions requiring the wintering bird surveys and a biodiversity net gain assessment to be undertaken, this would deny Natural England and the Biodiversity Officer the opportunity to properly assess, and potentially object to, the application before planning permission was granted and would leave the Authority at risk of challenge and not able to satisfactorily discharge its additional duties under the Habitats Regulations.

The Chair proposed that the Committee indicate it is minded to grant the application and authorise the Director of Regeneration and Economic Development to issue a notice of grant of planning permission, provided the applicant satisfactorily resolves the issues described by the Chair and set out below. 

On being put to the vote, 8 members of the Committee voted for the proposal and 1 member voted against with no abstentions.

Resolved that (1) the Committee is minded to grant the application; and

(2) the Director of Regeneration and Economic Development be authorised to issue a notice of grant of planning permission, providing no further matters arise which in the opinion of the Director of Regeneration and Economic Development raise issues not previously considered which justify reconsideration by the Committee, subject to:

i)  any conditions considered necessary by the Director of Regeneration and Economic Development;

ii)  the completion of a legal agreement under Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 to secure a financial contribution of £15,165 towards the Coastal Mitigation Service;

iii) receipt of information to satisfactorily address the comments of Natural England and the Council’s Biodiversity Officer, including an updated Ecological Impact Assessment, additional wintering bird surveys and an updated Shadow Habitat Regulation Assessment, to allow the Local Authority to undertake an appropriate assessment under the Habitat Regulations which demonstrates to the satisfaction of Natural England and the Council’s Biodiversity Officer that the development would not have an adverse effect on designated sites;

iv) receipt of a Biodiversity Net Gain Assessment undertaken in line with the most up-to-date DEFRA Biodiversity Metric and associated habitat mitigation/net gain plans which demonstrates a net gain in biodiversity would be achieved to comply with Local Plan Policy DM5.5 and the requirements of the Environment Act; and

v)  receipt of a revised flood risk assessment containing the most recent flood risk data and climate change allowances and receipt of a satisfactory consultation response from the Environment Agency.