39-apartment mixed-use redevelopment at Former Tunstall Library And Baths, Drill Hall And 17-19 Greengates Street, Tunstall

What was proposed

The scheme would convert and extend former library, baths and drill hall buildings into apartments, community and commercial uses, and leisure facilities.

“The application seeks permission to convert and extend the former Tunstall Library, Baths, and Drill Hall buildings to a mixed-use development comprising the following components: • 39 apartments (Class C3), broken down to provide 23no. apartments within the former library, 10 apartments within the former baths and 6 apartments on the first floor of the drill hall. • Commercial space, and community space within the former library building.”

Officer report

What officers recommended

Officers supported the principle of redevelopment but recommended refusal because heritage harm and poor apartment amenity were not outweighed by the benefits.

“Report Summary This report sets out to Members of the Planning Committee that the proposed mixed- use re-development of the former Tunstall Library, Baths and Drill Hall, to deliver 39 apartments, community space, public house, restaurant, and leisure facility, whilst acceptable in principle, cannot be supported in its current form due to the level of resultant harm to the significance of the listed buildings, and the sub-standard level of amenity afforded to the proposed…”

“Fundamentally - given that the group of buildings subject to this application are all either listed buildings or locally listed, and all fall within the park terrace conservation area - the report considers in detail the level of impact and harm to the heritage assets resultant from the proposed development.”

Officer report

Public representations

Two representations supported high conservation standards and asked for more protection of historic fabric and greater weight for Historic England’s advice.

“Material 3 rd Party Comments Received Total representations received: Representations summarised: - Potteries Heritage Society: No issues with the proposals provided that the works are carried out to high conservation standards.”

“- One other representation: appreciate that some harm to the fabric of the building need to be made to find a solution for the building, please give greater weight to the comments made by Historic England. Further work should be undertaken to ensure as much of the historic fabric of the building can be maintained whenever possible and the advice of Historic England implemented.”

Officer report

Who spoke

A late representor addressed the committee, an architect contributed an audio recording, and the developers and agent answered members’ questions.

The committee debate

Members rejected a proposal to defer the application for further window, amenity and highway information and a return before the end of 2026.

“25/FUL/00513) The Committee were advised of written representation received by the Local Planning Authority via email late on Monday 13 July 2026 from [name withheld]. A summary of the representation was provided, and [name withheld] attended to address the Committee in order to speak again the proposed development. Members received representation from [name withheld] (Croft Architecture) via an audio recording (with written transcript provided).”

“Planning Committee - Development Management Wednesday, 15 July 2026 3 Reason – insufficient information has been provided to make a determination on this application today’ was lost.”

Minutes

The vote

A motion to refuse the application for the four reported reasons was carried.

“A Motion, moved by Councillor L Watkins, seconded by Councillor S Watkins ‘That the application be refused for the reasons (1-4) as outlined within the report submitted’ was carried. Resolved – That the application be refused for the reasons (1 to 4) as outlined within the report submitted.”

Minutes