Category: Planning

John Hale (petitioner) said that the flue would be within 11 metres of 3 Moseley Avenue. He said residents do not agree that the character and nature of the Liscard area had changed sufficiently to accept a sixth chip shop. Mr. Hale said there were many hot food takeaways, four kebab shops and a myriad of other hot food takeaways. Going back eleven years, he said there were only seventeen places that hot or cold food could be bought but now there were fifty-eight.

Mr. Hale said the sleep of residents was being affected and the character and nature of the area was being eroded. He pleaded with the Planning Committee not to approve any more. He said the limit had been reached to what residents could put up with and they would remember when it came to voting next May. He mentioned the Neighbourhood Development Plan for the area and how they were a trailblazer in this regard. He said that it would be the only food shop there and would be out of character, he trusted the Committee had read the report and thanked them for listening to him.

Cllr Elderton asked if there was anyone on behalf of the applicant, there wasn’t. Cllr Darren Dodd said he wanted to add weight to what Mr. Hale had said and that there were plenty of hot food takeaways, chippies and kebab shops. He said there were two properties within forty metres and that he had spoken to Mr. Hale and the residents. Cllr Dodd said that residents were bitter because of the late night travelling to the hot food takeaways. He added his weight to the points raised by Mr. Hale.

Cllr James Keeley asked about the A4 use and whether this led to too many in a small area on that basis?
Cllr Elderton asked if he meant a proliferation of licensed premises?
Matthew Davies said there had been no changes, no change in local or regional policy. There had been a change in national policy but this wasn’t grounds to refuse the application.
Cllr James Keeley asked as there was no one from environmental health present, could the decision be delayed?
Accepting the application was proposed by Cllr Realey and seconded by Cllr Mitchell.
Nine councillors vote for, with Cllrs Kelly, Keeley and Johnson voting against. The application was approved.

The next application was for a change of use to a chip shop in Liscard (APP/11/00977).

Cllr Elderton said it could be found on pages 73-78 of the agenda. Matthew Rushton said it was a change of use to A5 and planning policy SH1 and SPD3 applied. He referred to separation distances, a section 106 agreement for a litter bin and a restriction on opening times.

Cllr Elderton said there was a petitioner and invited him to speak. David Hale said he spoke for over twenty-five households and had outlined nine points in his email. He said government guidelines issued four years ago stated that applications for a chip shop should not be approved within 400 metres of a school. Within 400 metres of the proposed chip shop were two schools, a secondary school called Oldershaw and a primary school St. Albans. He said there were two residential properties 1 Moseley Avenue and 3 Moseley Avenue which were within 40 metres on the highway route.

Matthew Rushton said the distance of 17 metres was wrong.

Cllr Salter asked a question about the A4 use. He asked if it was approved in 2008, could they not overturn it unless there was substantial change?

Cllr Elderton agreed that there would have to be change to the development or a change in legislation.

Cllr Mitchell said there were national policies on A4 uses and that a previous planning decision on another A4 use had already been overturned. He said there would be great difficulty in reversing the decision.

Cllr Johnson asked if the previous planning permission was granted on 31st July 2008, wasn’t the three years up?

Matthew Rushton replied that the application had been submitted before the expiry.

Cllr Johnson asked about the original application. The reply given was that no new plans had been submitted and it was the same development as in the previous application with the same plans.

Cllr Kelly asked about separation distance and asked if it did not meet policy. Matthew Rushton replied that it was not clear. He said they can’t reassess as it was an extension of time and not submitted in a different form.

Cllr Elderton said he would help to clarify as he had been on the committee that decided it, he said it was not sufficiently relevant. Cllr Salter said he remembered it. Cllr Kelly said it was predicated on the A4 use being on the Telegraph Road end of the site, however the application doesn’t limit the A4 use. Cllr Elderton said he was correct, there was no change in design.

The applicant said it had been difficult to find users and the only way was to subdivide it to get the widest possible usage. He said the planning permission granted in 2008 for an A4 use was vital as it affected their ability to raise funds for redevelopment which would be needed to refurbish the building. Mr. Long said it has a prominent position, but it was difficult in a recession as banks would only support tenants with cash in the bank and a high street trading record. They were restricted by their ability to raised funds. If the A4 usage was taken away from the corner overlooking Telegraph Road then it would limit their ability to find tenants. They had the support of a bank for the capital required and were engaging in a marketing project. They didn’t want to restrict the scope of tenants. The problem was if they failed to get A4 use they could lose prospective tenants and financial support. The building was in a “sorry state” and he was aware of the objections of the petitioners around distance and location. He said the bar was designed to face Telegraph Road which was in a prominent position in the main shopping centre. Mr. Long asked the Planning Committee for continued A4 use and thanked them for their time.

Cllr David Elderton asked if there was any ward councillor? There wasn’t. He asked the officers to answer the issue raised by the petitioner in Supplementary Planning Document 3 about the forty metres separation distance being reduced down to seventeen metres and whether this was acceptable.