Agenda item

Change of use of ground floor only from A2 to A5 hot food takeaway and delivery unit, installation of extraction and odour control system and ground floor extension to house external chiller and freezer rooms and new shop front (Amended plans).

Prior to the commencement of consideration of the report the Chairman informed the Committee that paragraph 3 of the report should read ‘David Freeman on behalf of Elvet Residents Association’ rather than David Freeman who wishes to support Elvet Residents Association’.

The Committee considered a report of the Planning Officer regarding an application for the change of use of the ground floor only from A2 to A5 hot food takeaway and delivery unit, installation of extraction and odour control system and ground floor extension to house external chiller and freezer rooms and new shop front at the former Lloyds Bank plc, 28 New Elvet, Durham (for copy see file of Minutes).

Susan Hyde, Planning Officer gave a detailed presentation on the application which included photographs of the site, location plan, elevations and floor plans of the proposed development.  The Planning Officer informed the Committee that the second reason for refusal in the report should read ‘to preserve or enhance the character’ rather than ‘to protect or enhance the character’.

Jonathan Lovell, Secretary of Elvet Residents’ Association, addressed the Committee to object to the application.  He informed the Committee that he endorsed the recommendation of the Planning Officer and views of the Environmental Health Officer on behalf of the Residents’ Association that the application should be refused.  Additionally, a takeaway pizza shop would not be appropriate at this location because the levels of traffic and parking in the area were already problematic.

Rob Booth, agent for the applicant, addressed the Committee.  The application proposed to install a franchise business on a 20 year lease which would provide a long-term use for a retail unit which was currently empty and had been for some period of time.  The applicant was willing to work with Planning Officers on the design of the shop front and the extraction system; the franchise had installed 30 units across the country where extraction systems and shop fronts had been approved by Council’s.  Although the business plan was for the unit to open until 11 p.m. daily, much of the business would be home delivery and collections, with very few customers eating within the proximity of the unit and there was no seating proposed at the unit, therefore the noise and litter problem would be minimal.

While the applicant was aware of local concerns regarding noise and parking issues Mr Booth reminded the Committee that there was already car parking in the area and no new parking provision was proposed.  The applicant had proposed to conduct a noise survey to assess the background noise at the location but had been informed that this would not be suitable.  The applicant was willing to work with both the Council and local residents to address issues of concern.

Councillor Conway informed the Committee that he supported refusal of the application for the reasons outlined in the report as well as parking in the area being challenging, with vehicles needing to reverse onto the main carriageway.  He moved refusal of the application.

Councillor Freeman informed the Committee he supported the recommendation that the application be refused.  The proposal was for a hot food takeaway which would operate for 7 days a week until 11 p.m. and which was near to Orchard House, a block of residential flats.  Additionally, there was a flat above the proposed takeaway which was occupied.  The proposed shop front would detract from the area and the police considered the hot food takeaway would result in more anti-social behaviour and be detrimental to residential amenity.  Councillor Freeman seconded refusal of the application.

Councillor Lethbridge expressed concern at the level of traffic density already in this area and understood the expressions of concern regarding the possible deterioration of the living environment.  He supported all that had been said by Members of the Committee.

Upon a vote being taken it was:

RESOLVED:

That the application be refused for the reasons, as amended, contained in the report.