Stafford restaurant can keep its relocated play area - despite neighbour's noise concerns
Objectors said the design is out of keeping with the surrounding area and affects a nearby Grade II listed building.
A Stafford restaurant can keep its relocated play area – despite concerns about noise affecting neighbours.
Objectors have also said the design of the new Hickory’s Smokehouse play equipment, which includes a hexagonal “tower”, is out of keeping with the surrounding area and affects a nearby Grade II listed building.
But supporters have said the facility is a valuable resource for families dining out and the play area gets children active and away from screens. Stafford Borough Council’s conservation team has said no harm to heritage assets was identified and no noise issues were raised by Environmental Health.
Stafford Borough Council received two objections and eight representations in support of the retention of play equipment at the side of the restaurant facing onto Newport Road. Planning permission granted for the restaurant in 2012 included consent for a play area, which was replaced with the current equipment.


The application was called into Stafford Borough Council’s planning committee for consideration by ward councillor Doug Rouxel. He said: “There are a number of concerns regarding noise on the site, which has increased since this new play area was installed.
“This is impacting residents on the Newport Road quite significantly. Some degree of noise control for the site is really needed to ensure that the business can continue serving its customers without significantly impacting the lives of residents around them.
“There are also a number of concerns about the appearance and design of the taller tower, which is out of character for the area and sticks out significantly – this section of Newport Road has a significant number of older properties and retains a fairly cohesive design language, including listed buildings, which this doesn’t fit with. This could be addressed through a tower more in keeping with the local area or screening of the play area – which would also help with the noise concerns.”
Kelly Smith, who spoke on behalf of residents at Wednesday’s planning committee meeting (October 21), said: “We go to Hickory’s, we like Hickory’s and we think it’s a fabulous addition to the town. Our objection is based principally on the effect it is giving on the quality of lives of our family and neighbours.
“When this site operated as a Hungry Horse pub, the play area was safely situated in a different place to where it is now, to the rear of the property, away from the road and the houses opposite, so it didn’t bother anybody. The equipment has been relocated directly into our sight lines and earshot.
“It’s a large bright red tower with stars on it – it’s entirely out of keeping with the appearance of our local area. The tower amplifies sound significantly.
“Residents experience significant noise disturbance, particularly on summer afternoons and evenings. I even felt compelled to email Doug at 10.50pm on one evening as we still had children squealing and running round this area.
“We urgently need reasonable boundaries. If this committee is minded to approve this application, we request higher solid screening round the area to mitigate the severe noise and improve the visual amenity and to limit the hours of use to 9pm each day.”
Three councillors voted against approving the play equipment retention, with four abstentions. Two members voted in favour and Councillor Scott Spencer, who chaired the committee, used his casting vote to approve the application.
Committee member Jill Hood said: “I think it’s unreasonable to ask that families would not be able to play in the play area because quite often families will go out and relax for quite a while past 9pm. I have small grandchildren and we have been here and stayed past 9pm.
“It is quite well-screened by the trees and the grounds are always immaculately kept, which I think is lovely for residents. I imagine screening could block the view – parents like to sit and keep an eye on their children and sometimes we have got to be careful that all areas are visible.”
Fellow committee member Councillor Anne Hobbs said: “I remember this going through in 2012 and they wanted to put the play area at the front, but there was a danger of traffic coming down the road and speeding out of control, which used to happen quite a lot on that corner. The stipulation was they built that around the back.
“They’ve moved it around and now they want us to approve it. I think that’s wrong and it is an overbearing thing on the road.”
A planning statement submitted as part of the application said: “The play area replaces the previous play area construction located to the side. This was removed during the refurbishment of the building and replaced with a more modern, safe and appropriate construction.
“The play equipment consists of a small climbing rig and children’s slide with cover. The wooden equipment covers a small area to the side of the main building with a maximum height of 3.4m and total length of 8.2m.
“The location of the play allows children to be monitored both internally and externally allowing parents and staff to keep a close eye on the area. In planning terms, the play area is set slightly lower than the nearest public footpath and road and is some 40 metres distant from the nearest residential building on the opposite side of Newport Road.
“In addition, the perimeter hedging offers further screening. Therefore, it can be seen that the proposal is a feature that would be normally associated with a pub/restaurant of this type and provide a facility for family use.
“There will be no detriment caused to any residential amenity given the location of the play equipment and the existing background road noise in the immediate vicinity. Also, the play equipment does not have any negative effect upon the adjacent highway or passing vehicles.”
Comment Guidelines
Iconic Media encourages reader discussion on our stories. User feedback, insights and back-and-forth exchanges add a rich layer of context to reporting. Please review our Community Guidelines before commenting.