Verdict in on bid to turn The Kelly pub into restaurant and homes after warning over horrendous traffic
Plans to convert an ex-pub into a café restaurant with a house in multiple occupation (HMO) and flats above have been blocked, following concerns about parking, increased traffic and privacy impacts on nearby residents.
South Tyneside Council’s Planning Committee, at a meeting this week, voted to reject a planning application for The Kelly public house, off Hedgeley Road, in the Hebburn area.
The residential part of the development included a single five-bedroom house in multiple occupation (HMO), as well as a single separate one-bedroom flat and three two-bedroom flats.
A building extension and new windows were proposed to accommodate the new flats, while the proposed five-bedroom HMO involved the conversion of an “existing first floor three-bedroom managers flat”, council planning documents state.
Meanwhile, indicative floor plans for the building’s ground floor submitted back in 2024 showed how the new restaurant/café use would operate, with a large seating area and several servery spaces.
During a council public consultation exercise on the plans, there was an objection from the Sunderland and South Tyneside branch of The Campaign for Real Ale (CAMRA) raising concerns over the loss of the pub use.
At the time of the Planning Committee, around 22 public representations had been lodged raising concerns ranging from increased noise, parking difficulties and the future tenants of the accommodation, to increased crime and antisocial behaviour and “overshadowing”.
A joint representation was also submitted by all three Hebburn North ward councillors, Adam Ellison, Richard Porthouse and Liz McHugh.
The trio raised concerns specifically about the HMO and flats element of the proposal, including concerns about increased traffic, parking and access issues, the “lack of need” for a new HMO in the area and the plans “fundamentally altering the character and nature of the building” which “carries local significance”.
Local councillors added the “residential element, with the permanence of residents within the building will push parking and those visiting the café/restaurant onto a street that lacks parking capacity, make manoeuvres dangerous and impede passing vehicles and buses, and remove established lines of sight on a road that is already highly residential and dangerous.”
It was noted the proposal would “provide social, economic and environmental gains by contributing to reducing the current shortfall in terms of housing supply and delivery whilst the commercial restaurant element would bring part of the building back into use as a local community facility.”
The planning application was discussed at a meeting of South Tyneside Council’s Planning Committee on Monday (September 15, 2025) at South Shields Town Hall, where Hebburn North ward councillors, Richard Porthouse and Liz McHugh, voiced concerns.
Cllr Porthouse described the plans as the “wrong development in the wrong place” and noted existing highways issues on Hedgeley Road where “certain areas are just single file and you cannot get two cars going past each other.”
Cllr McHugh also referenced existing “horrendous” traffic issues on Hedgeley Road, along with concerns about the close proximity of schools to the site.
“I have had residents contact me and I’m here to represent the residents for Hebburn North ward and I’m against it,” she said.
As both councillors were registered objectors and members of the Planning Committee, they were classed as ‘predetermined’ and were not allowed to participate in a formal vote on the development.
Other members of the decision-making panel raised concerns about the proposals, including councillor Joan Keegan who noted the site sits within a “densely populated area” with existing traffic and community safety issues.
Meanwhile, councillor Shirley Ford raised concerns about parking impacts linked to increased numbers of staff, customers and residents using the site, along with concerns about the “scale of the extension” to the building and impacts on nearby residents, including “increased loss of privacy to the bungalows behind.”
A member of the public also spoke in objection at the meeting raising concerns about odour and impacts on nearby residents, car parking levels and associated traffic and highway safety impacts and the lack of information about the “target residents” for the accommodation.
After being put to the vote the plans were refused by a unanimous vote, against the recommendation of council planning officers to approve.
Councillor Joan Hamilton, who led calls to refuse the plan by launching a formal proposal at the meeting, cited three main reasons for refusal.
Refusal reasons included parking in terms of highway safety and residential amenity, “overlooking” impacts to properties to the rear of the site and the design of the plans being “out of character” within the area.
Speaking earlier in the meeting, Cllr Hamilton said: “I’m not against the place being developed, but I think they should take a look at it and come up with a different proposal as to what they want to do with the building.
“Yes it is an eyesore and it’s a dumping ground at the minute, but I’m totally against this development.”
A council committee report prepared for the meeting said “normally change of use from a dwelling to an HMO for up to six persons is permitted development that does not require planning permission from the council”.
However, in the case of The Kelly public house, the “managers flat is ancillary to the public house and not a separate dwelling” and therefore requires planning permission, according to council documents.
Although it was noted that the “building will have to be extended” to “facilitate the proposed HMO rooms”, council planners said “the footprint of the building would however not be increased, and the resultant scale of the proposal is considered to be acceptable”.
Council planners noted there were “no other existing licensed HMOs in the immediate vicinity” and that there would not be “significant harm in terms of cumulative impact” due to the area’s mix of residential and commercial uses and that the future “day-to-day operational matters and management” of the residential use was the responsibility of the operator.
It was also noted that “there have been untidy land complaints received by the council relating to the site and therefore bringing the site back into use is considered a positive outcome.”
Despite recommending the plans for approval, and noting there was no “harm or adverse impacts” around residential amenity, biodiversity, highway safety or crime/antisocial behaviour, council planners did raise some concerns about design.
This included the “flat roofed frontage first floor extension proposed to the forwardmost element of the existing eastern single storey flat-roofed areas of the building appearing more prominent than the existing single storey flat roofed elements and somewhat out of character within the wider street scene, especially in views along Hedgeley Road.”
For more information on the plan and to track its progress, visit South Tyneside Council’s planning portal website and search reference: ST/0516/24/FUL
The applicant has the right to challenge the council’s refusal decision by lodging an appeal with the national Planning Inspectorate.