Lostock Hall takeway bid blocked over parking concerns in area 'where ambulances can't get through'

South Ribble Borough Council’s planning committee had been asked to consider a revised proposal for a hot food outlet at the junction of Watkin Lane and Hoghton Street.

However, members heard that parking in the vicinity was so problematic and erratic that ambulances had sometimes struggled to get past vehicles left obstructing narrow side streets.

Councillors dismissed the application back in October over concerns that the venture would make parking matters worse - and over the appearance of an extraction flue to be installed as part of the proposed conversion.

However, planning officer Debbie Roberts told the latest gathering of the committee that while a change to the flue meant that the design was now acceptable, there had not been “any attempt” to deal with the other issues that had led to the previous refusal - which also included the potential for increased noise disturbance for those living close to the premises.

It was, though, parking which once again proved the biggest stumbling block. Councillors heard that there were round-the-clock parking restrictions on the main Watkin Lane for 100 metres in either direction of the shop unit - and that the only spaces beyond that were pay and display.

Debbie Roberts said that parking was already “really difficult” in adjacent side streets and noted that it was most likely to be at a premium during the evening - the very time when the takeaway would be open - because residents would also be at home.

Lancashire County Council highways officials had not objected to the plans, but Lostock Hall ward councillor Lesley Pritchard told the committee that parking on pavements and double yellow lines was already commonplace in the area.

“There’s actually been ambulances [that] can’t get through…on Berry Street,” she explained.

“It’s [also] going to be a nightmare for delivery drivers - they can't turn around in Hoghton Street, so [they are] only going to be able to drive up [to the dead end] and then reverse back.”

The last time the plans were discussed, the committee was told that there were already 10 other takeaways in the space of half a mile - including a fish and chip shop right next door - although that, in itself, was not a planning reason to refuse the application.

Nevertheless, committee member Will Adams said the decision to reject the tweaked proposal would be a “straightforward” one, adding: “This [application] is not beneficial to that community or to the surrounding communities.”

His colleagues agreed and permission was unanimously refused.

The unit has previously been occupied by a fishing tackle shop and, more recently, a bridalwear outlet. Two bids to turn the premises into a takeaway in 2013 were also refused within months of each other.