Covered café seating at Amareta Café, Chadwell St Mary

What was proposed

The application sought a single-storey front extension with glazed panels and a roof, creating permanent covered outdoor seating without changing the café’s use or hours.

“This planning application seeks approval for the construction of a single storey front extension to create a permanent outdoor seating area within the front forecourt area of Amareta Café. There are no proposed changes to the use or hours of operation at the existing cafe…”

“The proposal would have a forward projection of 4.4 metres and a width of 6.9 metres. The front entrance door for the first floor flat above the retail unit, which is sited within the front elevation of the building, would remain unaffected by the proposal. The overall height of the front extension would measure 2.8 metres and have a flat roof design. The extension would be constructed from glazed panels with an aluminium frame creating horizontal panels.”

Officer report

The site and surroundings

The café is an end unit in a four-unit, two-storey shopping parade beside a footpath, within a mainly residential area where front development is limited.

“Amareta Café is an end of terrace unit set within a small retail parade currently consisting of 4 separate units. The terrace is two storeys in height providing residential accommodation to the first floor. The main entrance doors for three of the four units remain within the principal elevation of the terrace providing entrances to the flats above, with the application site being one.”

“The wider context of the area provides a predominantly residential area consisting of single dwellings and flatted developments. The appearance of the street scene is varied in terms of the presentation of residential dwellings. However, it is notable that additional development to the front…”

Officer report

Why officers advised refusal

Officers found no principle objection, but considered the extension’s design, materials, projection and prominent position harmful to the street scene and shopping parade.

“Firstly, it is relevant to highlight that no other front extensions are present within the associated parade, nor within the wider shopping parades along River View. For this reason, the proposal would appear out of character with the immediate street scene and conflict with the existing coherent building pattern of the shopping parades within the vicinity.”

“As a consequence of the aforementioned, the proposal would, by virtue of its appearance, design and prominent siting forward of the notional building line, is considered harmful to the character and appearance of the immediate street scene and wider shopping parade. The proposal is therefore considered to be contrary to the objectives of policies CSTP22, CSTP223 and PMD2 of the adopted Core Strategy and the NPPF.”

Officer report

Consultation responses

Highways raised no objection, Environmental Health supported the proposal subject to conditions, and one written comment supported the development.

“No objections subject to conditions relating to construction hours and the restriction of live and amplified music/ sound system which would be audible outside the premises or within adjoining buildings.”

“The application was advertised via individual neighbour letter and a site notice was erected nearby. One written comment of support has been received stating the following:”

Officer report

What supporters said

The support comment said the extension would provide an inclusive community space, improve the street scene, support the local economy and help the business grow.

“- Commitment to providing an inclusive space for residents and visitors - The extension would enhance the visual appeal of the street scene - Would contribute positively to the local economy - The café hosts community events enriching the area - Tasteful and sympathetic design - Will allow light to penetrate the building - Will help the business to grow - The local business will continue to thrive if allowed…”

Officer report

Speaking at the meeting

A speaker gave a statement, but the speaker’s role was not stated.

Members’ discussion

Members discussed comparable seating areas, pavement access, parking, the lack of objections, support from customers, operating hours and possible conditions.

“Members summaries that there are other sites in Grays with similar extended outside areas for extra seating, which work well. Members expressed concerns around pavement access and parking in the area.”

“Some Members noted that the lack of objections and the use of the resource made them more inclined to support it.”

Minutes

The decision

The committee approved the application as there were no objections, with stated economic benefits, claimed local compatibility and potential street-scene improvement.

“Alternative Recommendation Approve the application as there are no objections. It will provide further economic benefits, and it is not un-keeping with the local area. It will provide improvement to the street scene and is not uncommon to have these in front of business or narrow pathways.”

“The Chief Planning Officer added that he would seek delegation to address conditions and provide officer with the opportunity to consider any noise nuisance through conditions an attempt to manage potential complaints.”

Minutes