Jump to content

Work Restarts On Former Palace Restaurant


Colin James
 Share

Recommended Posts

Yea the dispute was to do with the owner of the shop next door who I believe also used to own mr chips? I think It was something to do with the boundary @ the rear of the properties where there building an extension that caused the dispute?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yea the dispute was to do with the owner of the shop next door who I believe also used to own mr chips? I think It was something to do with the boundary @ the rear of the properties where there building an extension that caused the dispute?

 

Yes dispute was between Alan Williams (former Mayor) as I understand he owns the property next to the Palace and when they started building they disturbed his boundary, not 100% sure of the details in full.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Work was started when planning app was applied for and had to stop because permission was refused 
They wanted vehicle access which was considered dangerous and the plans for the extension were out of character with the

rest of the street being in a conservation area.Planning has been refused on a number of occasions but was finally given.
The restaurant will now become a takeaway  :Hmm: with the first floor being converted into two flats and a flat being built on the rear. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Work was started when planning app was applied for and had to stop because permission was refused 

They wanted vehicle access which was considered dangerous and the plans for the extension were out of character with the

rest of the street being in a conservation area.Planning has been refused on a number of occasions but was finally given.

The restaurant will now become a takeaway  :Hmm: with the first floor being converted into two flats and a flat being built on the rear. 

 

They halted the work because of a legal battle ragwert, trust me, I know.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was under the impression they went 2 foot too far onto neighbouring property. Hence the hold up

 

Yes your somewhere new the truth, the adjoining property is owned by Alan Williams and this building work also blocks any future access to the second property but planning was granted, once the builder went too far over (so to speak) Mr Williams exercised his right to sue, hence the delay. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The restaurant will now become a takeaway  :Hmm: with the first floor being converted into two flats and a flat being built on the rear. 

 

The Palace is within the Cumulative Impact Zone and I think the Council/Police have already said they will oppose any new food shops. A takeaway is a lot different to it's previous use as a restaurant. I think Munchies opposite was opposed on those grounds but did get approved in the end ...

 

Maccies in Commercial Street applied for a later food licence and was refused as it was 'near' the Impact Zone.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Palace is within the Cumulative Impact Zone and I think the Council/Police have already said they will oppose any new food shops. A takeaway is a lot different to it's previous use as a restaurant. I think Munchies opposite was opposed on those grounds but did get approved in the end ...

 

Maccies in Commercial Street applied for a later food licence and was refused as it was 'near' the Impact Zone.

 

Please forgive me Roger but where is Maccies in Commercial Rd? That is a new one on me. Well this could be a good opportunity to get these outlets onside, reference Colin's late night food campaign...

 

Are you certain that permission was refused? Do you have anything to back this up because I am sure this would be an ideal example for Colin to use

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please forgive me Roger but where is Maccies in Commercial Rd? That is a new one on me. Well this could be a good opportunity to get these outlets onside, reference Colin's late night food campaign...

 

Are you certain that permission was refused? Do you have anything to back this up because I am sure this would be an ideal example for Colin to use

 

I think you misread my post. Maccies in Commercial STREET 

 

Late Licence Refused

 

I'm no expert on planning but the Palace obviously operated as a food establishment before it went to the wall so maybe the existing use means it can just re-open as a takeaway even if it is larger as they are building an extension to it? Any planning experts out there?

 

Rather like The Gamecock could transform from a pub to a shop. Or indeed The Buckingham. Without having to get additional permission for change of use.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think you misread my post. Maccies in Commercial STREET 

 

Late Licence Refused

 

I'm no expert on planning but the Palace obviously operated as a food establishment before it went to the wall so maybe the existing use means it can just re-open as a takeaway even if it is larger as they are building an extension to it? Any planning experts out there?

 

Rather like The Gamecock could transform from a pub to a shop. Or indeed The Buckingham. Without having to get additional permission for change of use.

 

The Palace did not go to the wall the owner of the building wanted it back and refused to give them a new lease. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They halted the work because of a legal battle ragwert, trust me, I know.

Just looked at planning apps for this place.Permission was turned down twice.

 

First refusal.   In the absence of a development proposal in accordance with policy HBA6  the proposed demolition

of the existing structure is considered contrary to HBA7 o the Herefordshire UDP.

Second refusal The proposal involves the formation of a vehicle access onto monkmoor street,owing to the narrowness of the street,inability to turn a vehicle within the site, lack of pedestrian refuge and poor visibility the formation of access here is considered prejudicial to the interest of highway safety.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just looked at planning apps for this place.Permission was turned down twice.

 

First refusal.   In the absence of a development proposal in accordance with policy HBA6  the proposed demolition

of the existing structure is considered contrary to HBA7 o the Herefordshire UDP.

Second refusal The proposal involves the formation of a vehicle access onto monkmoor street,owing to the narrowness of the street,inability to turn a vehicle within the site, lack of pedestrian refuge and poor visibility the formation of access here is considered prejudicial to the interest of highway safety.

 

 

And what? This had nothing to do with the work being halted. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The planning permission that has been implemented is for 'change of use of ground floor restaurant to food take away ...'

 

There is a condition which restricts the sale of hot food between 1.30am and 12 noon to protect the residential amenity of nearby residents.

 

However, the applicant has subsequently stated there is no intention to open as a takeaway, so who knows what is happening.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

The building work is coming along, hope it's going to be an eatery where you can sit down in. Hereford has been lacking places to eat for a long time.

 

I completely agree, okay we have the new fast food restaurants and one steak house in the Old Market but not a lot else, plenty of take away's you have the Sweet Chilli which is good and the Starting Gate but no Chinese sit down other than the little tiny one in East St.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...