Boutique hotel rejected due to ‘incomprehensive changes’ and impact on area

Plans to turn a city center building, which was previously used as a squat, into a boutique hotel have been rejected due to concerns about “incomplete changes”. The Mary Le Port Hotel was planned to open at 39-40 Street in Bristol city center and have at least nine bedrooms.

Bristol Live previously reported that Mugshot Restaurants Limited had signed a 25-year lease with Bristol City Council for the historic building, located in a conservation area. But the Planning Inspectorate rejected an appeal and planning permission for the change of use because of the loss of a pub and the impact on the surrounding area.

The government’s takeover of some of Bristol City Council’s planning departments began last month. Ministers put Bristol City Council into special measures in March after they decided the time it was taking to decide on hundreds of planning applications made by Bristol residents and businesses was far too long and there were no signs Labor administration then, in government, solve the problem. outstanding.

READ MORE – Oceanographer brought in to help search for missing Bristol student

READ MORE – Student accommodation in Bristol is the most expensive outside of London

Mugshot Restaurants Limited director Adam Bryan referred the application to the planning inspectorate after Bristol City Council failed to make a decision on the application within the required time frame. Meanwhile, Bristol City Council confirmed to the Planning Inspectorate that it was likely to refuse the plans.

In a report by Inspector Helen O’Connor of the Planning Inspectorate, she gave four clear reasons for refusing the application, namely:

• Whether the proposal would result in the unnecessary loss of a public house with reference to local and national planning policies.
• The effect of the proposal on the character and appearance of the area, particularly considering whether it would retain or enhance the town’s conservation area and Queen Square (CA) and nearby listed buildings.
• If proper arrangements were made for waste disposal.
• If adequate renewable energy generation were to be ensured taking into account local planning policies

It was previously the Looking Glass pub before it closed around 10 years ago and became derelict. In 2021, the building was occupied by squatters who at the time said the building was being used as a community space and solution for the homeless.

A in relation to three occupied properties on the High Street. The force said this was necessary because there had been an “increase in crime and anti-social behavior (ASB)” at 39-40, 45 and 46 High Street – addresses that had been occupied by squatters.

The report notes: “There is very little information provided on either side by the appellant in this case, other than referring to the long-standing vacancy and stating that the area is in need of investment. There is nothing to explain why the public house closed, nor what efforts there have been to reopen it since then.

“As none of the exceptions in policy DM6 are clearly demonstrated, it follows that the presumption to protect against loss of use of the public house applies.”

As part of the changes, the hotel would have introduced a roof extension to create the hotel’s ninth room. Described as “a shepherd’s hut-style room”, the Planning Inspectorate noted that this “would have little in common with the architectural detail or symmetry of the main elevation and would read as an incongruous and somewhat crude addition”.

The report also noted that an associated railing above the parapet wall, deck and hot tub “would exacerbate the bland effect” and “probable human activity on the deck would draw the eye.” They added that the roof extension would be “incompatible with the character and appearance of the appeal building”.

Wider concerns in the appeal decision included inadequate bin storage for the nine-bedroom hotel and a lack of plans to reduce carbon dioxide emissions from energy use.

The report admitted that the proposals would bring the building back into use and would likely bring investment that would improve the condition of the building and area. He also added that the boutique hotel could also have indirect economic benefits for other nearby businesses.

Photos from the planning application showed the building in a state of disrepair, with rubbish, damage, graffiti and mess around the site. However, Ms O’Connor felt that the impact on the local area and the “non-comprehensive” changes were sufficient reasons to reject the change of use application.

Ms O’Connor concluded: ‘The Planning Act requires applications for planning permission to be determined in accordance with the development plan, unless material considerations indicate otherwise. While there would be benefits arising from the development, particularly by bringing a disused building back into productive use and restoring an active frontage to the ground floor, I am not convinced that the appeal scheme would be the only means of doing this.

“As such, the possibility of securing similar benefits while avoiding the policy conflicts identified in the development plan cannot be ruled out.

“Consequently, I do not find that there are material considerations that justify determining the proposal otherwise than in accordance with the development plan. Therefore, for the considerations set forth above, I conclude that the appeal must be dismissed and the building permit denied.”

The full planning application and report can be found via this link or reference 23/00054/F.