104-bedroom hotel at West Walls, Carlisle

What was proposed

The application sought works to a medieval wall linked to a five-storey, 104-bedroom hotel with a restaurant and bar.

“The proposed development comprises the erection of a five-storey, 104-bedroom Premier Inn hotel (Use Class C1), incorporating a ground-floor restaurant and bar with associated kitchen and back-of-house facilities. The bedrooms would be distributed across the lower ground, first, second, and…”

Officer report

What happened before

The former hotel closed, fell into disrepair, suffered fire damage and was demolished between 2019 and 2020 before the site transferred to the council.

“The site was previously occupied by the Central Plaza Hotel which was constructed in 1881 and was a prominent local landmark in Carlisle. The building, recognised for its architectural and historic interest, was listed at Grade II in 1994. The hotel closed in 2003, and although planning permission for conversion to residential and leisure use was granted in 2004 (Ref. 04/03290), the approved works were not implemented.”

“In July 2011, the interior of the building suffered substantial fire damage, followed by on-going vandalism, resulting in a severely dilapidated and dangerous condition. A structural report commissioned by Carlisle City Council in May 2018 recommended demolition on safety grounds, which was subsequently undertaken between 2019 and 2020.”

Officer report

What officers recommended

Officers recommended approval, saying the hotel would support city-centre vitality and regeneration and its public benefits would outweigh harm to the listed wall.

“It is acknowledged that the proposal would cause some harm to the listed wall but the engineering solution for the construction of the new hotel was to provide propping to allow the current load restrictions along West Walls to be removed. Paragraph 215 of the NPPF states that where a development proposal will lead to less than substantial harm to the significance of a designated heritage asset, this harm should be weighed against the public benefits of the proposal.”

“Paragraph 215 of the NPPF states that where a development proposal will lead to less than substantial harm to the significance of a designated heritage asset, this harm should be weighed against the public benefits of the proposal. The site is currently a vacant, brownfield site which is enclosed by fencing/ hoardings and is having a significant adverse impact on the surrounding area.”

Officer report

Heritage concerns

Historic England and the Civic Trust objected that the concrete and membrane could trap moisture, cause movement and damage the medieval wall.

“Carlisle & District Civic Trust: - object to the works to the medieval wall. The trust concurs with the objections submitted by Historic England. The proposals include lining the medieval west wall with a waterproof membrane and the placing of a mass concrete infill between this and a reinforced concrete waterproof concrete stem and steel columns. The structural design report states that these works are necessary to resist the highway loadings from vehicles on West Walls.”

“The Carlisle and District Civic Trust have studied the amended information and continue to have objections to the works to the medieval wall. It is noted that a weak-mix concrete infill is proposed between the new retaining structure and the historic wall with a waterproof membrane against the wall and that a slip membrane will be placed between the weak mix concrete and the reinforced concrete structure.”

Officer report

Who spoke

An objector spoke against the application and the agent spoke in support.

What members discussed

Members discussed the wall’s significance, its structure and whether other sections could remain visible; officers clarified that further sections were publicly visible.

“Members discussed the significance of the medieval wall and if there were any sections further along that could be visible, the structure of the wall was also discussed.”

“The Principal Planning Officer clarified to Members that there were further sections of the medieval wall that was visible to the public and previously this section of the wall had been hidden.”

Minutes

The committee vote

A member moved to accept the officer recommendation, the motion was seconded and the application was approved unanimously.

“Following consideration of the application a Member moved to accept the Officer’s recommendation, this was seconded.”

“RESOLVED – That the application be approved subject to the conditions set out below with delegated authority being given to the Service Manager for Development and Implementation to add to and/or make any amendments to the conditions as considered appropriate.”

Minutes

The conditions

Approval required the works to begin within three years, follow approved documents, protect the exposed wall through a method statement and provide an information board.

“The works identified within the approved application shall be commenced within 3 years of this consent.”

“Prior to the commencement of development, a Method Statement for works to the section of medieval wall that is to be left exposed, shall be submitted for approval by the local planning authority. The development shall then be undertaken in strict accordance with the Method Statement.”

Minutes