Change of use from vacant barbers (A1), to hot food takeaway (A5).

The Principal Planning Officer gave a presentation on the application and updates / additional representations received following the publication of the agenda were provided; the schedule of committee updates is appended to these minutes.

In accordance with the criteria for public speaking Mrs Newman, representing Kington Town Council, and Mrs Baines, representing a number of local residents, both spoke in objection to the application, and Mr Simpson, the applicant’s agent, spoke in support.

In accordance with paragraph 4.8.2.2 of the Council’s Constitution, Councillor TM James, the local ward member, commented on a number of issues, including:

• The area was a mixture of small retail shops and residential dwellings.
• There were a number of concerns regarding highways issues due to cars parking on double yellow lines outside the nearby takeaway and supermarket.
• The nearby takeaway closed at 9pm and was not open 7 days a week.
• The town currently had an issue with antisocial behaviour which would be exacerbated with an additional late night premise.
• The proposed development was 150 metres from the nearest car park.
• The application should be refused due to the highways issues and the impact on the amenity of the residents of the neighbouring residential dwellings.

Members discussed the application and noted the concerns raised regarding highways and parking. Members felt that people would park outside the premise which, coupled with the traffic from the nearby supermarket and Chinese takeaway, would have an adverse impact on highway safety in the area.

Members also raised concerns in respect of the loss of amenity to the neighbouring residents. They noted that once a class A5 usage was established any type of takeaway could operate from the premise. Concerns were raised in respect of the suitability of the extraction system due to the location of the extraction flume.

In response to comments made by Members, the Assistant Director – Environment, Planning, and Waste noted that concerns regarding traffic and parking and the impact on neighbouring resident were material planning considerations and acceptable reasons for members to refuse the application.

The Locum Lawyer and the Democratic Services Officer had a brief discussion in respect of section 4.8.10.2 of the Council’s Constitution regarding the Further Information Report process. The Assistant Director – Environment, Planning and Waste, and the Locum lawyer, representing the Monitoring Officer, both felt that a Further Information Report would not be required and therefore the Committee could proceed to the vote.

Councillor James was given the opportunity to close the debate in accordance with the Council’s Constitution.

RESOLVED

THAT the application be refused on the following grounds.

1          The proposed development is considered to have a detrimental impact on public highway issues and is therefore considered contrary to Policies DR2 and T11 of the Herefordshire Unitary Development Plan.

2          It is considered that the proposed development will have a detrimental impact on the amenity of dwellings within close proximity to the application site, by means of odour and noise that would be generated from the proposed development. Therefore the proposal is considered contrary to Policies S5, DR2 and DR4 of the Herefordshire Unitary Development Plan.