Agenda item

ELLA AND FLEUR HOT YOGA, 23A PITTVILLE STREET

Report of Licensing Officer

The Licensing Team Leader, Louis Krog, introduced the report regarding an application from Mr Roman Wroath of Ella and Fleur Hot Yoga, to place an advertising board outside 23A Pittville Street, Cheltenham.   The proposed advertising board measured 110cm x 60cm and complied with the sizes recommended in the council’s policy.  A picture of the proposed structure was attached at Appendix A.  The Officer outlined the proposed times that the A board would be displayed and advised that the width of the pavement available was 4.2m.  The proposed location of the A board was attached at Appendix B.

The Officer drew members’ attention to terms of the policy as mentioned in 3.3 and 3.4 of the report and advised that one objection had been received from the Highways Enforcement Officers on the grounds of A boards being a nuisance to pedestrians and disabled people using the footway.  The Officer pointed out that although the business operated from the first floor, the premises also benefitted from a shop front at street level and referred to the photograph at Appendix C.   He advised that members should determine whether the location of the business on the first floor disadvantaged them and necessitated the need for additional advertising, or whether the presence of a street level shop frontage, small though it was, was sufficient advertising to negate the need for an A board.  He asked members to be mindful of promoting the council’s policy and advised that the Officer recommendation was to refuse the application on the grounds that the business had a presence at ground level.

Before moving on to questions to the Officer, Councillor Chard declared a personal interest, in that he knew the applicant having lived next door to him.

In reply to members’ questions, the Officer advised that all new applications came before the committee and in addition there was an objection to this application.  He also confirmed that the business was entirely on the first floor with a staircase leading from the shop front.  Members expressed concern over the flow of pedestrian access around the A board in view of the number of bus stops in that area that were very popular, with queues forming past the bus shelters resulting in restricted access for wheelchair users and buggies.  One member pointed out the inaccuracies in the scale of the submitted location plan.

The Chair invited Mr Wroath to address the committee in support of his application.  Mr Wroath acknowledged members’ concern about the bus stops and stated that he would offset the A board in relation to the last bus stop near his premises to create a larger space for people to move round.  He felt that the other bus stops further down the street did not cause a problem.  He told members that he felt their shop frontage was overwhelmed and lost, being situated between larger shops on either side.  An A board would pinpoint where his business was and he informed members that he also wanted to advertise to people waiting for buses that his business had a juice and coffee bar upstairs. 

In response to a question from a member about his business, Mr Wroath explained that primarily he ran hot yoga classes (45 minute yoga classes in a room heated to 40 degrees) with 4-5 classes a day.  He wanted to expand his business into the next door property on the first floor with a treatment room and a café selling juices and healthy food.  He continued that he didn’t have any footfall from outsiders as yet into the café and so wanted to promote it. 

One member suggested enlarging the advertising on the A board and putting it in the shop front or considering an overhead sign.  The applicant pointed out that only people directly opposite would see any advertising in the shop frontage and not people further along the street. With regard to an overhead sign, the applicant felt this would be very expensive compared to an A board, with planning permission, design costs, installation etc, and told members that he wanted to be in central Cheltenham and not on an industrial park and that he wanted the business to look good, but that he was just starting out and couldn’t afford good signage at this time.

In support of the application, some members agreed that people didn’t always look up to see overhead signage and felt that the pavement was wide enough to be able to accommodate an A board.  A member pointed out that other businesses with a larger frontage had been allowed an A board, so questioned how this could be refused and also felt that small businesses should be supported and encouraged.

There being no further questions and with the applicant not wishing to add anything else, the Chair advised the committee that he felt they could deviate from the policy as the business was upstairs and the frontage was very narrow and he wanted to encourage businesses generally.  He advised that if granted, the licence for the A board would be for 12 months from the date of this meeting.

Upon a vote, it was 5 for, 2 against and 2 abstentions.

RESOLVED THAT,Mr Roman Wroath’s application to place an A board on the highway at 23A Pittville Street be granted for 12 months, as members were satisfied that the location was suitable.