Agenda item

The Planning Team Leader:

1. advised that retrospective planning permission was sought for change of use of premises at 137 High Street, Lincoln from retail (Use Class E) to hot food takeaway (Sui Generis) and installation of an extraction flue to the rear

2. highlighted that the use had not yet commenced, however, the applicant had installed the extraction flue and air conditioning units to the rear, which formed the retrospective element of the application

3. described the location of the application property at 137 High Street, part of  a former Co-Operative store built in 1892, having a traditional shop front and part of a larger building of three units at ground floor on the west side of High Street

4. highlighted that the rear of the property was accessed via Tanner’s Court and the yard to the rear of Nos 137-141 High Street

5. reported that the building was located within Conservation Area No 6 ‘West Parade and Brayford’

6. provided details of the policies pertaining to the application, as follows:

7. advised Planning Committee of the main issues to be considered as part of the application to assess the proposal with regards to:

8. outlined the responses made to the consultation exercise, which included a petition received from local residents

9. referred to the Update Sheet tabled at the meeting which included an additional  response received in support of the proposed development

10. concluded that:

The Committee considered the content of the report in further detail.

The following comments emerged from discussions held:

·         Considering the location of this site south of Portland Street was in the Central Mixed Use Area, it included multiple takeaways and barber shops, therefore it was not predominantly mixed use.

·         There was no need for another takeaway in the area, although in this case the business was moving from across the road and therefore acceptable.

·         It must be sad for residents having to live in this area with so many food outlets.

·         Following a site visit, it was noticed that the flue was still a shiny silver colour although the applicant had agreed to paint it matt black to reduce visual impact. This should form part of the conditions of planning permission if the scheme was granted.

·         Concerns were raised regarding rats and vermin at the rear of the premises. On visiting the site, a lack of refuse bins was observed. Disposal bins would be crucial to the operation of the business and should be conditioned accordingly.

·         It was rather presumptuous to see that the applicant had already erected signage at the front and side of the building, without permission for change of use of the property.

·         It was very disappointing that the work had been started without permission.

·         The amount of retail outlets in this part of the High Street was a disgrace.

·         In reality, these types of shops must be needed as if the public didn’t use them, they would be closed. It would be a welcome change to see more quality independent retail outlets although this was not a legitimate reason to refuse this application, subject to relevant planning conditions.

·         Retrospective planning applications were an insult to this Committee and local residents. The applicant should be fined.

·         We were now too far down the road having so many takeaways in the area to refuse permission for this one.

Councillor Longbottom referred to a study she had seen which referred to areas with high amounts of takeaways being linked to poor health. It was important for us to look at our objectives as a local council in respect of the concentration of food takeaways in our Central Mixed Use areas. Improving the health of the residents of our city was an important consideration here.

Councillor Vaughan emphasised that in the late 1990’s he and Councillor Strengiel voted against all these takeaways at Committee. It should have ended years ago.

Members asked whether the extraction flue was fitted to proper specifications?

The Planning Team Leader responded to members concerns, questions and comments as follows:

·         The extraction flue was constructed to specifications laid down by our Environmental Health colleagues.

·         A condition could be imposed on grant of planning permission for the flue to be painted black if members were so minded, perhaps within a timescale of 3 months.

·         There was a dedicated area proposed for bin storage units, the bins to be provided by BIFFA. Environmental Health colleagues were satisfied with its location to the rear of the property and would enforce its proper use.

·         He understood members concerns regarding the concentration of hot food takeaways in this area in terms of health of the residents of the city. It was difficult to say that this business in itself affected the Mixed Use Area, as it was relocating from across the road. He would take the comments made in this respect back to officers to bear in mind in response to further similar requests for planning permission.

A motion was proposed, seconded, voted upon, and

RESOLVED that a condition be placed on grant of planning permission for the flue to be painted black within 3 months’ time.

RESOLVED that:

1.    The petition submitted by residents, as appended to the officer’s report be received.

2.    Planning permission be grantedsubject to the conditions as set out below.

Conditions

·         Development carried out within 3 years

·         Development in accordance with the submitted plans

·         Extract system installed in accordance with details and not to be changed without written consent of the LPA

·         Extraction flue to be painted black within 3 months’ time

·         Retention of refuse storage area