Friday 27 September 2013
Media Enquiry from Damian Wrigley, Guernsey Press:
On relation to the refusal to grant the New King Fisher chip shop a take away licence, can the department please answer the following questions. Environmental Health have raised concerns about the ventilation system not being sufficient, the upgrade planned as 'unsightly' and odour to surround properties unacceptable.
These were some of the reasons cited for turning down the application for the chip shop to operate as a take away.
Can the Department please explain this decision, surely the ventilation and odour problems will exist regardless of whether the shop is takeaway or not?
How does the fact people are now forced to eat in the restaurant going to reduce the odour to surrounding properties or solve the ventilation issues?
If you can please respond by 1pm tomorrow, I would be grateful.
Environment Department response:
The application was a retrospective one to operate a take away in addition to the restaurant use that previously existed on the site. In considering the application, the views of Environmental Health were invited and the concerns expressed were taken into account along with all other material planning matters as set out in the planning report.
The Department was obliged to make a decision on the application presented to it. Despite deferral of the application and several approaches to the applicant no satisfactory solution was put forward. It is the responsibility of the applicant, not the Environment Department, to resolve issues such as this, and although the Department has given opportunities and assistance to them to do so the application remained unacceptable and was consequently refused.
In considering the application, the fact that it was retrospective and the business was already operating in a certain way could not influence the Department's decision, which was taken on the planning merits of the application as presented.
It should be noted that the Department cannot prevent the restaurant use continuing as that was the previous use of the building. There has been an intensification of use of the property with the addition of the takeaway use. The current extract ventilation system is unsuitable and is causing significant amenity problems because of the nature of the cooking and this would have to be addressed regardless of the use class. Even if it remains a restaurant the ventilation is an outstanding matter which would need to be resolved by the applicant.
It is hoped that in the light of the refusal of consent the applicant will engage positively with Environmental Health and the Environment Department in order to rectify the problems that have been identified and enable a suitably revised application for the take away element to be approved.
ENDS
