Takeaway, restaurant and studio flat at 65 Queens Road, Hastings

The site and surroundings

The site is a vacant two-storey terraced commercial property in the town centre, beside a busy road, pedestrian crossing and nearby residential uses.

“Site and surrounding area This application relates to No.65 Queens Road, a two-storey terraced property with commercial at ground floor. The property is currently vacant, however was previously a fresh food grocery shop (Class E). The shop front is open and stepped back from the front elevation of the neighbouring building of No.64 and forward of No.66 Queens Road. A roller shutter is in place to secure the premises when closed.”

“Queens Road is a busy A road with parking restrictions both sides of the road. A pedestrian crossing is close to the application site with zig-zag road restrictions directly to the front.”

Officer report

Earlier permissions

Earlier permissions covered a shopfront and internal alterations in 1964 and an illuminated projecting box sign in 1970.

“Relevant planning history Application No. HS/63/01153 Description Installation of new shop-front and integral alterations. Decision Permission with conditions on 16/01/64”

“Application No. HS/70/00028 Description Display of illuminated projecting box sign. Decision Permission with conditions on 15/01/70”

Officer report

What officers recommended

Officers recommended refusal because the proposal raised unresolved concerns about highway safety, amenity, character, health and the quality of the accommodation.

“Conclusion In light of the above assessment, the proposed development is considered unacceptable. Insufficient information has been provided to demonstrate that the scheme would not give rise to adverse impacts on highway safety, and the proposed residential accommodation would provide substandard living conditions due to inadequate internal storage.”

“Furthermore, in line with Policy LP1 of the Hastings Development Management Plan (2015), the Council is required to have regard to advice from relevant partner organisations, including East Sussex County Council. In this instance, ESCC Public Health has raised an objection to the proposal, as such significant weight is given to this objection in accordance with Policy LP1 of the Hastings Development Management Plan (2015).”

Officer report

Consultation responses

Highways raised no objection subject to conditions, while Environmental Health and Public Health objected and the Police raised concerns.

“Consultation comments Highways - No objection subject to conditions Environmental Health - Objection…”

“East Sussex County Council Public Health - Objection Licensing – No response Planning Policy- No response Waste Service – No Objection subject to conditions Police – Concerns raised…”

Officer report

Who spoke

The proposed operator spoke in support with the applicant’s agent.

What members debated

Members questioned parking, safety, opening hours, health, waste, amenity, extraction noise and the studio, and found the concerns persuasive despite the vacant property being reused.

“Members asked questions of the Petitioner, the Applicant and Officers regarding parking and highway safety, late-night opening hours, public health concerns, refuse storage, residential amenity impacts, the extraction flue and associated noise. Speakers and Officers provided clarifications in response, and Officers re-emphasised their reasons for refusal as stated in the report.”

“Members debated the proposal. Councillors Rumfitt, Simnett, Lawrence and Lauchlan acknowledged that the application proposed to bring a vacant property back into use. However, Officer’s concerns regarding highway safety and parking, noise and odour from the extraction flue, refuse storage arrangements, the potential impact on neighbouring residents together with the constrained layout of the proposed studio, were persuasive reasons for refusal.”

Minutes

The committee vote

The committee unanimously voted to refuse the application in accordance with the officer recommendation.

“With refusal of the application in accordance with the Officer’s recommendation having been proposed by Councillor Simnett, seconded by Councillor Lawrence, the Chair called upon the Committee to vote and it was…”

“RESOLVED (unanimously): To REFUSE the application for the reasons set out in the Officer’s report.”

Minutes

The decision and reasons

The application was refused because of highway safety, inadequate storage, noise, overlooking, refuse odours, roller shutter details, health effects and late-night character impacts.

“The application proposes opening hours of 12:00 - 23:00 Sunday- Friday and 12:00-02:00 Saturdays for the proposed hot food takeaway/restaurant along with the installation of an extraction flue.”

“The proposed late-night opening hours would result in activity and noise that is out of keeping with the prevailing character and function of the area, thereby harming its character and appearance. The proposal is therefore contrary to Policy DM1 and criterion (b) of Policy SA4 of the Hastings Local Plan – Development Management Plan (2015).”

Officer report