An Alderley Edge restaurant has had its application to install an external sitting area on the pavement of London Road refused.
Yara planned to raise the level of the pavement outside 29, London Road to the level of the restaurant and provide ramped access from pavement level into the restaurant - which would be DDA compliant.
Cheshire East Council refused to grant planning permission on the grounds that "the proposal is contrary to the interests of pedestrian safety by virtue of reducing the amount of available pavement for the safe circulation of pedestrian traffic at this location on the pavement adjacent to London Road. As such, the proposed development would be contrary to the interests of pedestrian safety in this location, contrary to policy DC6 of the Macclesfield Borough Local Plan 2004".
In 2011 Yara built an outdoor seating area on the public highway without obtaining permission from Cheshire East Council and the following year CEC's Highways team removed it, along with the seating area outside Konak because they considered them to be an obstruction of the highway and were built without their permission.
Comments
Here's what readers have had to say so far. Why not add your thoughts below.
Unlike certain commentators, I find that rather than roaming the streets at midnight being intimidated by the periodically alleged intoxicated late night revellers throwing cigarette ends at me and urinating on my car, it is much more enjoyable to walk on side streets and the fringes of the village in daylight.
To which end I'm surprised how there is a complete absence of grumbling about the significant lengths of footpaths obstructed by overgrown hedges and bushes - in at least two instances I am aware of, forcing pedestrians to step dangerously on to the road in order to pass.
I suspect the objections are not wholly related to footpath widths!
I thought it would be helpful for others to see the article regarding The Botanist:-
http://bit.ly/1gNXwOX
As a non smoker is always nice to walk through a cloud of secondhand smoke... Not !
On a pleasant evening it is actually enjoyable to avoid a stuffy and often noisy interior particularly since the traffic is fairly light later. Then during the day it's good to be able to watch the world pass by.
As for the smokers - well, I agree it can be unpleasant but there is always the option to dine inside or go elsewhere.
Frequenting Alderley's restaurants is entirely optional folks!
Again to echo my previous comment - it is strange that a certain shop on London Road seems to be unchallenged in its wares spilling across most of the footpath at a point where a bus stop and litter bin already impede passage.
I say again I suspect there is more here related to a personal dislike of licenced premises than any real compromise to pedestrians.
You say "as for the smokers-well, I agree it can be unpleasant but there is always the option to dine inside or go elsewhere"
Fair comment.
What you may find though is that these outside areas are granted as "alfresco dining areas". If that isn't the purpose and they are just comfortable smoke areas they should be removed.
Surely it is the decision of the restaurant as to what they permit on their property subject to relevant laws?
I'm certain that if a restaurant lost significant business as a direct result of permitting smoking in an external area the owners would be very quick to change their policies.
From a fairly regular review of the outside seating areas of restaurants in a wide range of towns I see no evidence of smokers discouraging business.
Since a small number of Alderley residents seem hugely averse to both alcohol consumption and smoking I would be very happy - as it is one of my skills - to help any of these people prepare a sensible business plan for a booze and fag free restaurant. Of course a critical assumption would be the numbers of customers and their average spend per visit which any would be entrepreneur anticipated.
Meanwhile I imagine that in the absence of it being a criminal offence to serve alcohol and permit smoking in outdoor areas restauranteurs in Alderley Edge will regrettably continue to offer a service that does not meet a small minority of residents' expectations.
A simple rule of thumb. Is there enough room on the pavement for a Guide Dog and blind person to walk side by side along the pavement without the blind person being forced to go into the road?
To all the cafe owners, shop owners and irresponsible car drivers who park on pavements. Think about that, and yes , we do have Guide Dog owners in the village.
Slightly off topic I recently witnessed in AE a father with a buggy and 2 little boys have to walk in the road because a driver had parked on the pavement completely blocking it. It is this type of example as well as the proposed seating area that should remind people that pavements are for pedestrians, not for cars, and not for seating areas if there is insufficient room.
On top of that, the contempt that Yara had for building one in the first place without permission and refusing to remove it, forcing CEC to take action, should be enough to warrant saying NO!
Stephen, regarding overgrown bushes, etc., well there should be some ranting about that because there are some shocking examples in Wilmslow.
These 2 premises have no rights over the pavement.
Anyone got that link?
http://bit.ly/1hjfMkf
So since Stay had a terrace, which I am assuming no one complained about, it follows that Yara should be able to have one too.