Chatteris Indian restaurant loses Government appeal to retain rooftop smoking terrace
AN Indian restaurant will be forced to take away a rooftop smoking terrace after losing a planning appeal.
Businessman Viv Salisbury owns the restaurant at 8 Market Hill, Chatteris, and was told by Fenland District Council that the smoking area he created on the roof had to go.
Fenland Council began enforcement action which was halted pending an appeal but now a Government inspector has backed the council’s refusal to allow it to stay.
Mel Middleton says in his ruling that the open nature of the roof would enable customers to be seen by neighbours thus “compromising their privacy.
“In my opinion such a relationship has and would continue to have a harmful effect on the living conditions at neighbouring residential properties.”
You may also want to watch:
Mr Middleton added: “The extensive area set aside for smoking, aided by the provision of tables and chairs, is likely to encourage and accommodate numerous people wishing to linger on the roof on warm evenings.
“This is likely to generate noise, which would cause additional harmful disturbance to the nearby residents.”
- 1 Dr Nik 'over the moon' after pulling off shock Labour victory
- 2 Dr Nik Johnson elected Mayor of Cambridgeshire and Peterborough.
- 3 Steve Count 'no doubt' Tories will review 'our performance' as his future is decided
- 4 NHS doctor ‘banned from describing himself as ‘Dr’ on ballot paper’
- 5 Connor tops poll as Tories retained Fenland dominance on county council
- 6 Expect 'honesty and integrity' says new police and crime commissioner
- 7 Warner Bros spotted filming new Batman movie at Burghley House
- 8 Election 2021: Wisbech West tops poll for lowest turnout
- 9 Election shock: Tories lose overall control of Cambridgeshire County Council
- 10 Drink driver TWICE rammed off-duty officers' car
The inspector says the wooden fence is “finished in a yellow stain and is particularly prominent and looks alien and uncharacteristic in this conservation area. In its present location it is also very dominant in the news from the nearby street.”
Although the inspector accepted Mr Salisbury planned to improve it, the new fence would be higher and as a result “would be more prominent than the existing fence.” It was not acceptable in a conservation area.
The inspector added that Mr Salisbury had disputed whether the smoking area needed planning consent in the first place but he said that since the applicant had freely made the application which was then refused, he had to assume he knew that it did.