The First Presbyterian Church in Belfast is objecting to plans for a new gambling establishment at the site of an old Ann Summers shop in the city centre.
Representatives for and against a planning application for the change of use from retail unit to amusement arcade and adult gaming centre at 51 Rosemary Street gave robust submissions to the Belfast City Council Planning Committee this week.
Councillors deferred a decision on the application for the new establishment, the site of which is close to the First Church on a side street off Royal Avenue.
READ MORE: Belfast Council told “abusive” pet owners turning Giant’s Ring into “dog toilet”
READ MORE: Belfast alley gate delays leave city councillors “frustrated”
There is a live application for 12 residential units adjacent to the site 31-39 Royal Avenue. There are currently three other amusement/gambling premises within 200 metres in the immediate area. Despite council officers recommending approval for the application, councillors decided on a deferral with a view to compiling valid reasons to reject the application.
The First Church’s building at 41 Rosemary Street is the city’s oldest surviving place of worship. 51 Rosemary Street was granted permission for a shop sign as an Ann Summers shop in 2005. The site has been empty since the shop moved to different premises.
South Belfast DUP MLA and the current Assembly Speaker, Edwin Poots, has lodged an objection to the application at City Hall.
In all there were three letters of objection sent to the council. They raised concerns including the nature of the description of the application, the principle of a non-retail use in this location, and the impact on the character and appearance of the conservation area.
The objectors also raised issues of noise, litter, and traffic regarding the application, health and well-being, the impact on the image and profile of Belfast City Centre and fears of “clustering” of gaming centres in the area.
At the Planning Committee meeting, Diana Thompson on behalf of the First Church said: “Amusement arcades are not acceptable in the prime retail core and that is clearly set out in the council’s own amusement policy. Approval will cause a cluster of these uses within a small area. The arcade will be a bad neighbour to the church.”
She added: “The First Church is more than a place of worship, it is a tourist and cultural hub for the city centre, playing an active role in community and religious life. The Church is only 22 metres from the proposal site but because of this separation and a set back, there is apparently no significant impact. The Church disagrees.
“The gaming activity will jar with the religious, spiritual, cultural and tourist activities that are located within the church, central halls and its associated grounds.”
She said it was “entirely inappropriate,” and “the wrong development in the wrong place”.
She added: “It is highly questionable whether (gaming establishments) add vitality to an area, they do not provide active street frontage at ground floor level because their interior is screened, and they do little to project the image that Belfast is open for business.”
An agent for the applicant Sam Stranaghan told the committee: “We welcome the careful consideration given by the officers and the recommendation to approve. As the report confirms, this proposal is essentially a relocation from existing premises in North Street forced by the redevelopment of that area, and is acceptable in principle in the primary retail core, is policy compliant and will cause no harmful impacts.
“Rather, by spending £200,000 refurbishing a dilapidated, vacant unit, securing eight jobs and bringing footfall to this part of the core, it will support vibrancy. Notably, expert consultees note it will cause no harm to the setting of the listed Church or the character and appearance of the conservation area.”
He added: “The Church has been coexisting for many years with many other users not of its ilk, and probably not to its taste. It sits cheek by jowl with the licensed 3Cs social club with its outdoor tables for food and drink, Sunday opening from noon, and gaming machines. And the council has not once complained about it.
“The application site itself was for many years an Ann Summers outlet, with a distinctive adult offer. And still the life of the Church, and its tourism and cultural functions coexisted and flourished.
“As the report confirms, it is not in close proximity to the Church, but 30 metres away, separated by an alley and two commercial premises. Environmental Health has no concerns about noise, nuisance or any other impact.”
He added: “The recent objection from Edwin Poots adds absolutely nothing to the Church’s objection, it replicates it, and is deserving of no greater weight just because, respectfully, it comes from an MLA.”
The council planning report states: “Building Control Service considers that there may be an issue in respect of the proliferation of amusement arcade use at this location, which might impact upon the character and amenity of the area.”
Despite this, council officers state in the report: “It is considered that there is not a proliferation of amusement arcades given there are no other amusement arcades on Rosemary Street.”
The report continues: “Building Control have listed five other amusement arcades, however two of these are located greater than a five minute walk from the site which are not considered to contribute to proliferation of this area. A total of four amusement arcades within a 200 metre radius of the site is not considered to impact on the overall character and appearance of this section of the city centre.”
It adds: “Environmental Health considered the potential impact on the proposal in terms of noise, odour, contaminated land, litter and general nuisance and offered no objection to the proposal.
“Adjacent the site is a live application for 12 apartments at first to fourth floors of 31-39 Royal Avenue. The windows of the habitable rooms do not face onto the current proposal or its front curtilage on Rosemary Street apart from the windows to the proposed first floor terrace.
“This terrace is protected by a parapet wall and given the existing high ambient noise levels it is not considered that there will be an adverse impact from noise should both proposals be granted permission.”
Join our Belfast Live breaking news service on WhatsApp
Click this link or scan the QR code to receive breaking news and top stories from Belfast Live. We also treat our community members to special offers, promotions, and adverts from us and our partners. If you don’t like our community, you can check out any time you like. If you’re curious, you can read our Privacy Notice.
It adds: “DFI Roads were consulted and offered no objection to the proposal. Historic Environment Division were consulted on the potential impact on the setting of listed buildings, and offered no objection to the proposal.
“In conclusion, having regard to the Local Development Plan the proposal is therefore considered to comply with (policy) as it will not result in any significant harm to human life, health or wellbeing.” The report concluded it was “suitable for a main town centre use” and would “not result in an unacceptable adverse impact on the environment.”
The application will return to the Planning Committee later in the summer.
For all the latest news, visit the Belfast Live homepage here and sign up to our daily newsletter here.