PLANS to turn a taxi office into a “restaurant” have been refused after Council officers argued that the business would in fact be a take away.
Customers at the proposed restaurant, at 98 Morley Street, would have to walk through the kitchen area to access the only toilet in the building.
The former taxi office shut last summer, and late last year H Feroz submitted a planning application to convert the dilapidated building into a restaurant.
If it had been approved, the restaurant would have customer space of just 13.5 square metres space for just 13 diners, who would sit on stools facing the walls and windows of the business.
But the application has now been refused by Bradford Council, with officers claiming the business would be a take away in all but name.
The Council’s current planning policies, implemented in 2014, prevent new take aways from opening within 400 metres of a school, park or youth oriented recreation facilities.
The policy was implemented to reduce child obesity in Bradford.
Takeaway plan for Great Horton Road is refused for being too close to school and park
Since then, dozens of takeaway applications across the district have been refused.
Calling this proposed business a restaurant was an attempt to “circumvent” this policy – planning officers claim.
The building lies within the Little Horton Lane Conservation Area, just outside Bradford city centre.
It is a short walk from Bradford College, Bradford Ice Arena and a number of nursery schools.
There had been two objections to the application, with one claiming the area already suffers from a “huge rat colony that currently thrives from the take away’s.”
The report by planning officers said: “The description of the use as a restaurant appears to be in order to circumvent the requirements of the council’s hot foot takeaway supplementary planning document which would seek to resist new hot food takeaways in this location.
“The building is a very modest scale, and the internal layout provided shows a roughly 50/50 split between the cooking/servicing area and the area afforded for customers.
“The internal area provided for customers is only approximately 13.5 Sqm, providing a maximum of 13 covers in an informal layout facing the walls and window, in an arrangement not dissimilar from what is commonly seen at a hot food takeaway or, sandwich bar, where the majority of trade is on a takeaway basis.
“The accuracy of the description of development is debatable, and it can be reasonably assumed given the restricted nature of the layout that the operation of this establishment would be more in keeping with a takeaway. The provision of cooking facilities and extraction would indicate this will be orientated towards hot food. This being the case, as the site falls outside the boundaries of an allocated centre, and is within 400m of a youth orientated facility, the principle of development is unacceptable.”
Officers also said the waste storage facilities planned for the business was “unacceptable” adding “The applicant has failed to demonstrate that the arrangements for trade waste bins are practicable and will not become reliant on the public highway. This would impact adversely on local amenity, possibly health, and storage on the highway could impair the ability of people to move around their neighbourhood freely and safely.”