Opposition to extending opening hours of retail unit in new Shoreham seafront development

Adur District Council’s planning committee voted to defer a decision on opening hours for the unit at the former Riverbank Business Centre, 39 Old Shoreham Road, during a meeting on Monday (November 8).

The plans were the subject of two separate planning applications: AWDM/2044/20 and AWDM/1801/21, made in 2020 and 2021 respectively.

Both sought to amend a condition which limits the opening hours of the unit to between 8 am and 6 pm as part of the 120 dwelling Ropetackle development (AWDM/0935/13).

The applicants originally sought to extend opening hours to between 6 am and 11 pm, but reduced this to 7 am to 10 pm following conversations with council planning officers.

The first application was made by One Stop (a prospective operator) and the second was made by the retail unit’s owner (in case One Stop pulls out).

Councillor Stephen Chipp sought to understand the request, saying: “Is the simple fact that you [the owner] haven’t been able to fill the unit as retail and that we’re now having to look at alternative employment spaces and uses of the building?”

A representative of Landmark Estates, Philip Holdcroft, confirmed that this was the case as there had been ‘no retail interest’ in the empty unit.

Mr Holdcroft said: “Obviously a year later, whilst we have good relationships with One Stop, the building has been vacant and we’ve got no assurances that One Stop themselves would meet their contractual obligations to move into the building.”

Mr Holdcroft said that the extended hours could help to entice alternative operators. 

But the application garnered some 23 objections, some from Ropetackle residents who said they purchased their properties under the impression that opening hours would be restricted for the unit.

Interim chair of the Waterfront Residents’ and Tenants’ Association John Burrow, said they are ‘strongly against’ the plans.

“Residents are attracted to the waterfront estate on the understanding that they enjoy a quiet and well managed environment,” said Mr Burrow.

“Yet, less than one year after occupation, we’re being faced with a proposal that destroys that.

“Adjoining occupiers are extremely concerned about this unplanned intensification of use every day of the year, and even the reduction in hours recommended by officers.”

Mr Burrow said this objection was related to potential levels of traffic, noise and potential parking issues. 

He called for the opening hours to be between 7 am and 8 pm instead.

Another resident said: “This is further disturbance into a lifestyle that we did not buy into.”

In response, a planning officer said: “Conditions, as we can see from these applications, can be changed.”

After hearing residents’ concerns, the planning committee voted to defer the application.

Councillors also expressed their own concerns over the proposed hours.

Jeremy Gardner (Lab, St Mary’s) called it a ‘monumental difference’ when compared to the original proposals.

“Clearly there will be a much bigger issue with noise, business and activity into the evening that will be attracted into places with a convenience store, so I’m really not in favour of this,” he said.

But council officers pointed out that retail and convenience stores fall under the same ‘use class’ or category in planning terms and the key issue is in fact the proposed opening hours change.

Tania Edwards (Con, Southlands) said she was ‘horrified at the extended hours that are being proposed’.

But Mr Chipp said he could not see a reason for refusing the changes and leaving the unit empty ‘just because it affects the neighbours’.

Mr Holdcroft explained that a delivery management plan would restrict when deliveries could take place and the size of delivery vehicles attending the shop.

“There are safeguards which can be made to address local residents’ concerns,” he said.

Proposals may be brought back to a future meeting once alternative, potentially shorter opening hours have been considered.