Proposed variation of condition 7 of planning permission dccw2003/3853/f (variation of condition 7 to allow trading to 23.00, 7 days a week (application no. Cw2002/3803/f)) to allow trading to be until 01:00 hours on Sunday to Thursdays and until 02:00 on Friday and Saturday. With customer delivery only sales and no sales counter sales.

The application was refused contrary to the Case Officer’s recommendation.

(Proposed variation of condition 7 of planning permission dccw2003/3853/f (variation of condition 7 to allow trading to 23.00, 7 days a week (application no. Cw2002/3803/f)) to allow trading to be until 01:00 hours on Sunday to Thursdays and until 02:00 on Friday and Saturday. With customer delivery only sales and no sales counter sales.)

The Development Manager gave a presentation on the application.  He noted that the Planning Committee had refused permission on 3 February 2016 but a temporary permission had subsequently been allowed on appeal.

In accordance with the criteria for public speaking, Mr M Jones, a local resident, spoke in objection.  Mr A Salariya, the applicant, spoke in support.

In accordance with the Council’s Constitution, the local ward member, Councillor P Rone, spoke on the application.

He made the following principal comments:

•                  He questioned whether anything had changed since the Committee had refused the original application on the grounds that it was contrary to policy SD1.

•                  He noted that the planning inspector had not considered that a permanent permission could be granted and he sought clarification as to what monitoring of compliance with the conditions had taken place. He noted that the residents had submitted a schedule of breaches, together with photographic evidence of breaches which had been accepted as accurate.

•                  He was concerned that if permission were granted there would be further breaches and in time an application for a further extension of working hours further eroding the amenity of local residents.

•                  The premises was a food factory just 30 ft away from the nearest residential property with four properties within 100ft.

•                  It was not a local facility serving a local need and was too disruptive to residents.

The Planning Inspector had granted a temporary permission to allow further assessment of the impact on neighbouring properties.  The Committee was not satisfied that the parking barrier the applicant was required to put in place was operating effectively, and considered that there had been breaches of the conditions and that the applicant had not demonstrated that they could prevent an adverse impact on residential amenity.

The Development Manager commented that photographs showed that parking barriers had been put in place, but there was a question as to their effectiveness as photographs also showed crowds in the restricted area.  It was not known, however, if the people in the crowd were customers of the applicant.  He did not question the evidence of breaches that had been submitted. However, it would have been helpful if incidents had been reported to the council at the time to permit them to be investigated.  That was why he had recommended a temporary permission, to allow the matter to be reviewed.

The local ward member was given the opportunity to close the debate.  He reiterated his concern that granting permission would have a severe impact on the amenity of local residents.

Councillor Greenow proposed and Councillor Williams seconded a motion that the application be refused on the grounds on which the Committee had previously refused permission as set out at paragraph 1.4 of the report.  The motion was carried with 10 votes in favour, 2 against and 1 abstention.

RESOLVED:  That permission be refused on the grounds that the extension of opening hours would give rise to increased disturbance to nearby residents such that acceptable levels of residential amenity would not be safeguarded, contrary to Policy SD1 of the Herefordshire Local Plan – Core Strategy.