Owner of Bradford diner says if planning appeal rejected he can’t stay open

Bradford Telegraph and Argus: Hanqs Diner Hanqs Diner

The boss of a Bradford steak house is in a planning battle which he says could force him to shut the diner losing 20 jobs.

Qaisar Aziz, who co-owns Hanq’s Diner in Rooley Lane with Navinder Hare, was in court this week for breaching an enforcement notice issued by Bradford Council which wants him to remove two extraction flues.

The Council says the flues are visually intrusive, could cause odour problems for nearby residents, and that planning permission was never given for them.

Mr Aziz has appealed to the Planning Inspectorate against the enforcement action and, as a result, the legal proceedings have been adjourned until February but he says the diner’s future remains in doubt.

“If we have to remove the extraction flues then we can’t operate,” he said.

“We can not run a diner without extraction fans. We will have no option but to close and 20 people will lose their jobs.”

Mr Aziz says the diner already had permission for the flues when it was running as a Little Chef so originally he and his partner had not applied for permission when they renewed them.

“All these issues of noise and being next to a residential area were looked at 20 or so years ago when permission was first granted,” he said.

“They should not need to look at these again because they were dealt with in the past. We are not doing anything new with these flues – if anything they are better than the old ones.”

Earlier this year an appeal was allowed over alterations and a screen fence at the diner after the plan was initially turned down by Bradford Council in June – however, the planning inspector did uphold a refusal of permission for air conditioning and a smoking shelter.

Mr Aziz said: “The extraction flues do not make lots of noise. We are right next to the motorway, there’s a 24-hour petrol station and there’s noise from other units. We’ve only got one neighbour and he’s sent in a letter to the Council in our support.”

Ian Horsfall, planning manager at Bradford Council, said: “Mr Aziz erected unauthorised flues on the roof of his business premises.

“He submitted planning applications to retain them but these applications have been refused as the flues were visually detrimental. Their location was also likely to create an odour for nearby residents.”

Comments (35)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

7:13am Thu 12 Dec 13

Albion. says...

This place seems to feature every few months, last time it was late opening. Other places carry on for years without repeated newspaper reports. Is someone just trying it on here? (which seems to be coming normal practice in Bradford).
This place seems to feature every few months, last time it was late opening. Other places carry on for years without repeated newspaper reports. Is someone just trying it on here? (which seems to be coming normal practice in Bradford). Albion.

7:40am Thu 12 Dec 13

Joedavid says...

Very strange situation here in this story.
Where is the photo of the objected to fans T&A?
Also is there a previous photo to let your readers judge.
Very strange situation here in this story. Where is the photo of the objected to fans T&A? Also is there a previous photo to let your readers judge. Joedavid

7:46am Thu 12 Dec 13

tinytoonster says...

he could have assumed he was ok with the flues i suppose but i wonder if its because of the new build next door?
built quite a few houses on that small space next to it.
that wont have been questioned because they get a nice council tax wedge!
nice food there by the way!!
he could have assumed he was ok with the flues i suppose but i wonder if its because of the new build next door? built quite a few houses on that small space next to it. that wont have been questioned because they get a nice council tax wedge! nice food there by the way!! tinytoonster

7:56am Thu 12 Dec 13

BB&B!! says...

Of course he though the flues would be ok this place used to operate as a Little Chef? I think that was it, it was certainly a food outlet.
Of course he though the flues would be ok this place used to operate as a Little Chef? I think that was it, it was certainly a food outlet. BB&B!!

8:23am Thu 12 Dec 13

angry bradfordian says...

Do these business owners not bother with searches when buying property?
Surely his solicitor should have told him if Little Chef's planning permission had lapsed, rather than just assuming everything would be fine. The council's planning website is usually extremely clear on when applications lapse.

I'm sick of reading about these people using the moral blackmail of losing jobs when everything doesn't go their own way in getting retrospective permission.
Do these business owners not bother with searches when buying property? Surely his solicitor should have told him if Little Chef's planning permission had lapsed, rather than just assuming everything would be fine. The council's planning website is usually extremely clear on when applications lapse. I'm sick of reading about these people using the moral blackmail of losing jobs when everything doesn't go their own way in getting retrospective permission. angry bradfordian

8:43am Thu 12 Dec 13

Avro says...

I agree, one again its the moral blackmail attempt at getting permission, which has nothing to do with the fact that they breached enforcement.
I agree, one again its the moral blackmail attempt at getting permission, which has nothing to do with the fact that they breached enforcement. Avro

9:40am Thu 12 Dec 13

arm grab man says...

Another pathetic decision by Bfd council
Just move to Leeds they encourage business there
Another pathetic decision by Bfd council Just move to Leeds they encourage business there arm grab man

9:52am Thu 12 Dec 13

webshow says...

Bradford Council are stupid as they come. It used to be Little Chef which does the same type of cooking and it's next to a motorway - it seems someone at the council is trying to shut them down for good.
Bradford Council are stupid as they come. It used to be Little Chef which does the same type of cooking and it's next to a motorway - it seems someone at the council is trying to shut them down for good. webshow

12:38pm Thu 12 Dec 13

modman61 says...

Another nail in the coffin for small businesses by Bradford Council
Another nail in the coffin for small businesses by Bradford Council modman61

12:57pm Thu 12 Dec 13

Bone_idle18 says...

Surely there must be an alternative to the giant extractors, I've seen plenty of restuarants without them. I suspect they're not as cheap though, and if you're trying to run a business, you need to keep costs down at the moment.
Surely there must be an alternative to the giant extractors, I've seen plenty of restuarants without them. I suspect they're not as cheap though, and if you're trying to run a business, you need to keep costs down at the moment. Bone_idle18

1:25pm Thu 12 Dec 13

arm grab man says...

Would the council prefer it to be a vandalised building or maybe the owner should take a leaf out of the councils book and copy there examples like broadway or the odeon or the town centre as a whole .
As for these " massive extractors " you can hardly seen them
Would the council prefer it to be a vandalised building or maybe the owner should take a leaf out of the councils book and copy there examples like broadway or the odeon or the town centre as a whole . As for these " massive extractors " you can hardly seen them arm grab man

2:56pm Thu 12 Dec 13

Northern1 says...

Seems an odd decision. It used to be a Burger King as well as Little Chef, so the 'odour' of flame grilled meat emanating from the premises is hardly something new.
Seems an odd decision. It used to be a Burger King as well as Little Chef, so the 'odour' of flame grilled meat emanating from the premises is hardly something new. Northern1

4:57pm Thu 12 Dec 13

alive and awake says...

Joedavid wrote:
Very strange situation here in this story.
Where is the photo of the objected to fans T&A?
Also is there a previous photo to let your readers judge.
I agree where is the photo of the flues? Lazy reporting again.
[quote][p][bold]Joedavid[/bold] wrote: Very strange situation here in this story. Where is the photo of the objected to fans T&A? Also is there a previous photo to let your readers judge.[/p][/quote]I agree where is the photo of the flues? Lazy reporting again. alive and awake

5:47pm Thu 12 Dec 13

tinytoonster says...

Northern1 wrote:
Seems an odd decision. It used to be a Burger King as well as Little Chef, so the 'odour' of flame grilled meat emanating from the premises is hardly something new.
like i said earlier, built some new properties nearby so maybe that could be the issue?
[quote][p][bold]Northern1[/bold] wrote: Seems an odd decision. It used to be a Burger King as well as Little Chef, so the 'odour' of flame grilled meat emanating from the premises is hardly something new.[/p][/quote]like i said earlier, built some new properties nearby so maybe that could be the issue? tinytoonster

7:21pm Thu 12 Dec 13

Avro says...

BB&B!! wrote:
Of course he though the flues would be ok this place used to operate as a Little Chef? I think that was it, it was certainly a food outlet.
If you digest what the council say, they are talking about new flues installed rather than existing flues of old.

Basically the new owner installed flues in new locations, which makes them intrusive and could now case odours for residents.

Had he retained the existing flues in the same locations, there would not have been a problem or breach!
[quote][p][bold]BB&B!![/bold] wrote: Of course he though the flues would be ok this place used to operate as a Little Chef? I think that was it, it was certainly a food outlet.[/p][/quote]If you digest what the council say, they are talking about new flues installed rather than existing flues of old. Basically the new owner installed flues in new locations, which makes them intrusive and could now case odours for residents. Had he retained the existing flues in the same locations, there would not have been a problem or breach! Avro

11:52pm Thu 12 Dec 13

bragaboutbfd says...

Avro wrote:
BB&B!! wrote:
Of course he though the flues would be ok this place used to operate as a Little Chef? I think that was it, it was certainly a food outlet.
If you digest what the council say, they are talking about new flues installed rather than existing flues of old.

Basically the new owner installed flues in new locations, which makes them intrusive and could now case odours for residents.

Had he retained the existing flues in the same locations, there would not have been a problem or breach!
The article didn't suggest the flues had been moved, and the owner said they were not doing anything new with them, other than perhaps upgrading them (which you can assume would be the case, since the Little Chef was there a while ago). It could be argued that the newer flues would be quieter and more efficient than old ones due to technology advances? But you never know.

Either way the facts remain:
- I much prefer seeing a running business in what was a total eye sore for years, right at the gateway to the city and the council should do whatever they can to support the business. Nothing seems to say what a mess of a city when you have a big boarded up building just as you come off the motorway
- It seems like the neighbour, the person who you could argue is most likely to be affected, has no objections, then there must be at least some argument against the councils decision
- You cant argue that there is a noisy motorway and 24 hour petrol station at the same location, and as pointed out it was a Little Chef and Burger King previously - so the arguments saying there will be noise and fumes once again, sound strange....unless of course the new extractors are of course big oversized mammoth monsters, installed to go with the american theme (i doubt this though)
- Are the job losses accurate, exaggerated or attempted blackmail as some have implied? Well who knows, but it is likely that this business does employ staff and there is a business now where there hasnt been one for years...and so simple maths would suggest job losses if the business closes!

I do hope the council supports this business and offers advice and helps them remedy the situation - it didn't seem clear from the article, if the flues were too big, in the wrong place or this place can simply no longer be a food outlet (or a combination). It would be a shame for the council to force them to close and we go back to the eyesore that was there previously. The city is in such a state, that hopefully the council wont be against giving businesses some care and personal attention if required - they dont seem to be doing much else right now! (sorry council but I will always find it justifiable to say things like that as long as we have a big hole, empty shops and a city which to most is in a pretty poor state in terms of retail at least, all under your watch).
[quote][p][bold]Avro[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]BB&B!![/bold] wrote: Of course he though the flues would be ok this place used to operate as a Little Chef? I think that was it, it was certainly a food outlet.[/p][/quote]If you digest what the council say, they are talking about new flues installed rather than existing flues of old. Basically the new owner installed flues in new locations, which makes them intrusive and could now case odours for residents. Had he retained the existing flues in the same locations, there would not have been a problem or breach![/p][/quote]The article didn't suggest the flues had been moved, and the owner said they were not doing anything new with them, other than perhaps upgrading them (which you can assume would be the case, since the Little Chef was there a while ago). It could be argued that the newer flues would be quieter and more efficient than old ones due to technology advances? But you never know. Either way the facts remain: - I much prefer seeing a running business in what was a total eye sore for years, right at the gateway to the city and the council should do whatever they can to support the business. Nothing seems to say what a mess of a city when you have a big boarded up building just as you come off the motorway - It seems like the neighbour, the person who you could argue is most likely to be affected, has no objections, then there must be at least some argument against the councils decision - You cant argue that there is a noisy motorway and 24 hour petrol station at the same location, and as pointed out it was a Little Chef and Burger King previously - so the arguments saying there will be noise and fumes once again, sound strange....unless of course the new extractors are of course big oversized mammoth monsters, installed to go with the american theme (i doubt this though) - Are the job losses accurate, exaggerated or attempted blackmail as some have implied? Well who knows, but it is likely that this business does employ staff and there is a business now where there hasnt been one for years...and so simple maths would suggest job losses if the business closes! I do hope the council supports this business and offers advice and helps them remedy the situation - it didn't seem clear from the article, if the flues were too big, in the wrong place or this place can simply no longer be a food outlet (or a combination). It would be a shame for the council to force them to close and we go back to the eyesore that was there previously. The city is in such a state, that hopefully the council wont be against giving businesses some care and personal attention if required - they dont seem to be doing much else right now! (sorry council but I will always find it justifiable to say things like that as long as we have a big hole, empty shops and a city which to most is in a pretty poor state in terms of retail at least, all under your watch). bragaboutbfd

12:41am Fri 13 Dec 13

Ahrmen Aleg says...

They have clearly upset someone who is being vindictive.
Being there seen it got the tea shirt.
Of course it always needed extractor fans.
Of Course the officer who made this ridiculous decision or recommendation counts on the fact that the council legal bill is paid by me and you.
But we fail to share in the spoils..

Probably the Christmas brown paper envelope is missing in the planning office.
They have clearly upset someone who is being vindictive. Being there seen it got the tea shirt. Of course it always needed extractor fans. Of Course the officer who made this ridiculous decision or recommendation counts on the fact that the council legal bill is paid by me and you. But we fail to share in the spoils.. Probably the Christmas brown paper envelope is missing in the planning office. Ahrmen Aleg

12:43am Fri 13 Dec 13

Hanqs diner says...

Bone_idle18 wrote:
Surely there must be an alternative to the giant extractors, I've seen plenty of restuarants without them. I suspect they're not as cheap though, and if you're trying to run a business, you need to keep costs down at the moment.
The extractors meet the governments specs and are the smallest size that is allowable.
[quote][p][bold]Bone_idle18[/bold] wrote: Surely there must be an alternative to the giant extractors, I've seen plenty of restuarants without them. I suspect they're not as cheap though, and if you're trying to run a business, you need to keep costs down at the moment.[/p][/quote]The extractors meet the governments specs and are the smallest size that is allowable. Hanqs diner

12:47am Fri 13 Dec 13

Hanqs diner says...

angry bradfordian wrote:
Do these business owners not bother with searches when buying property?
Surely his solicitor should have told him if Little Chef's planning permission had lapsed, rather than just assuming everything would be fine. The council's planning website is usually extremely clear on when applications lapse.

I'm sick of reading about these people using the moral blackmail of losing jobs when everything doesn't go their own way in getting retrospective permission.
Once activated, planning permission does not lapse. Little chef and Burger King operated from the site as a food outlet for over 20yrs. There is no attempt here for blackmail, but just the use of common sence. The premises are still licences to be used as food outlets.
[quote][p][bold]angry bradfordian[/bold] wrote: Do these business owners not bother with searches when buying property? Surely his solicitor should have told him if Little Chef's planning permission had lapsed, rather than just assuming everything would be fine. The council's planning website is usually extremely clear on when applications lapse. I'm sick of reading about these people using the moral blackmail of losing jobs when everything doesn't go their own way in getting retrospective permission.[/p][/quote]Once activated, planning permission does not lapse. Little chef and Burger King operated from the site as a food outlet for over 20yrs. There is no attempt here for blackmail, but just the use of common sence. The premises are still licences to be used as food outlets. Hanqs diner

12:49am Fri 13 Dec 13

Hanqs diner says...

arm grab man wrote:
Another pathetic decision by Bfd council
Just move to Leeds they encourage business there
Unfortunate we did not listen. Your suggestion was the advice we were given by many people, but we decided to open in and support the city we were born and brought up in.
[quote][p][bold]arm grab man[/bold] wrote: Another pathetic decision by Bfd council Just move to Leeds they encourage business there[/p][/quote]Unfortunate we did not listen. Your suggestion was the advice we were given by many people, but we decided to open in and support the city we were born and brought up in. Hanqs diner

12:51am Fri 13 Dec 13

Hanqs diner says...

Bone_idle18 wrote:
Surely there must be an alternative to the giant extractors, I've seen plenty of restuarants without them. I suspect they're not as cheap though, and if you're trying to run a business, you need to keep costs down at the moment.
The flues are the minimum size allowed and required to meet the council specs. The environmental health department who usually would deal with the matter have no objections.
[quote][p][bold]Bone_idle18[/bold] wrote: Surely there must be an alternative to the giant extractors, I've seen plenty of restuarants without them. I suspect they're not as cheap though, and if you're trying to run a business, you need to keep costs down at the moment.[/p][/quote]The flues are the minimum size allowed and required to meet the council specs. The environmental health department who usually would deal with the matter have no objections. Hanqs diner

12:52am Fri 13 Dec 13

Hanqs diner says...

webshow wrote:
Bradford Council are stupid as they come. It used to be Little Chef which does the same type of cooking and it's next to a motorway - it seems someone at the council is trying to shut them down for good.
It's a very good question, rather than advice and suggestions in helping come to a sensible solution, persecution and harassment.
[quote][p][bold]webshow[/bold] wrote: Bradford Council are stupid as they come. It used to be Little Chef which does the same type of cooking and it's next to a motorway - it seems someone at the council is trying to shut them down for good.[/p][/quote]It's a very good question, rather than advice and suggestions in helping come to a sensible solution, persecution and harassment. Hanqs diner

12:54am Fri 13 Dec 13

Hanqs diner says...

arm grab man wrote:
Would the council prefer it to be a vandalised building or maybe the owner should take a leaf out of the councils book and copy there examples like broadway or the odeon or the town centre as a whole .
As for these " massive extractors " you can hardly seen them
From the many issues we have faced since we took over the site, it's seems the council do prefer a derelict Bradford.
[quote][p][bold]arm grab man[/bold] wrote: Would the council prefer it to be a vandalised building or maybe the owner should take a leaf out of the councils book and copy there examples like broadway or the odeon or the town centre as a whole . As for these " massive extractors " you can hardly seen them[/p][/quote]From the many issues we have faced since we took over the site, it's seems the council do prefer a derelict Bradford. Hanqs diner

12:58am Fri 13 Dec 13

Hanqs diner says...

Albion. wrote:
This place seems to feature every few months, last time it was late opening. Other places carry on for years without repeated newspaper reports. Is someone just trying it on here? (which seems to be coming normal practice in Bradford).
It has been almost two years when we were in the paper regarding late opening. Despite many objections especially from senior labour councillors, the independent planning committee saw sense in our application and approved it at the dismay of the councillors. Since that time all applications have been rejected and also refused the opportunity to present our case to the planning committee. Just to add. All the fears the objectors had, have never been realised.
[quote][p][bold]Albion.[/bold] wrote: This place seems to feature every few months, last time it was late opening. Other places carry on for years without repeated newspaper reports. Is someone just trying it on here? (which seems to be coming normal practice in Bradford).[/p][/quote]It has been almost two years when we were in the paper regarding late opening. Despite many objections especially from senior labour councillors, the independent planning committee saw sense in our application and approved it at the dismay of the councillors. Since that time all applications have been rejected and also refused the opportunity to present our case to the planning committee. Just to add. All the fears the objectors had, have never been realised. Hanqs diner

1:04am Fri 13 Dec 13

Hanqs diner says...

Avro wrote:
BB&B!! wrote:
Of course he though the flues would be ok this place used to operate as a Little Chef? I think that was it, it was certainly a food outlet.
If you digest what the council say, they are talking about new flues installed rather than existing flues of old.

Basically the new owner installed flues in new locations, which makes them intrusive and could now case odours for residents.

Had he retained the existing flues in the same locations, there would not have been a problem or breach!
The old flues were 20 yrs old and not efficient or environmentally friendly. Yes we relocated them to a new more efficient location so they are directly above the kitchen. And replaced the fans with new ones and designed them based on advice from the environmental health dept. we have yet to meet one person who can smell any odours, and the neighbour who lives next door cannot smell any odours so we find it hard to believe anyone else could.
[quote][p][bold]Avro[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]BB&B!![/bold] wrote: Of course he though the flues would be ok this place used to operate as a Little Chef? I think that was it, it was certainly a food outlet.[/p][/quote]If you digest what the council say, they are talking about new flues installed rather than existing flues of old. Basically the new owner installed flues in new locations, which makes them intrusive and could now case odours for residents. Had he retained the existing flues in the same locations, there would not have been a problem or breach![/p][/quote]The old flues were 20 yrs old and not efficient or environmentally friendly. Yes we relocated them to a new more efficient location so they are directly above the kitchen. And replaced the fans with new ones and designed them based on advice from the environmental health dept. we have yet to meet one person who can smell any odours, and the neighbour who lives next door cannot smell any odours so we find it hard to believe anyone else could. Hanqs diner

1:08am Fri 13 Dec 13

Hanqs diner says...

bragaboutbfd wrote:
Avro wrote:
BB&B!! wrote:
Of course he though the flues would be ok this place used to operate as a Little Chef? I think that was it, it was certainly a food outlet.
If you digest what the council say, they are talking about new flues installed rather than existing flues of old.

Basically the new owner installed flues in new locations, which makes them intrusive and could now case odours for residents.

Had he retained the existing flues in the same locations, there would not have been a problem or breach!
The article didn't suggest the flues had been moved, and the owner said they were not doing anything new with them, other than perhaps upgrading them (which you can assume would be the case, since the Little Chef was there a while ago). It could be argued that the newer flues would be quieter and more efficient than old ones due to technology advances? But you never know.

Either way the facts remain:
- I much prefer seeing a running business in what was a total eye sore for years, right at the gateway to the city and the council should do whatever they can to support the business. Nothing seems to say what a mess of a city when you have a big boarded up building just as you come off the motorway
- It seems like the neighbour, the person who you could argue is most likely to be affected, has no objections, then there must be at least some argument against the councils decision
- You cant argue that there is a noisy motorway and 24 hour petrol station at the same location, and as pointed out it was a Little Chef and Burger King previously - so the arguments saying there will be noise and fumes once again, sound strange....unless of course the new extractors are of course big oversized mammoth monsters, installed to go with the american theme (i doubt this though)
- Are the job losses accurate, exaggerated or attempted blackmail as some have implied? Well who knows, but it is likely that this business does employ staff and there is a business now where there hasnt been one for years...and so simple maths would suggest job losses if the business closes!

I do hope the council supports this business and offers advice and helps them remedy the situation - it didn't seem clear from the article, if the flues were too big, in the wrong place or this place can simply no longer be a food outlet (or a combination). It would be a shame for the council to force them to close and we go back to the eyesore that was there previously. The city is in such a state, that hopefully the council wont be against giving businesses some care and personal attention if required - they dont seem to be doing much else right now! (sorry council but I will always find it justifiable to say things like that as long as we have a big hole, empty shops and a city which to most is in a pretty poor state in terms of retail at least, all under your watch).
The flues have been upgraded & relocated to a more efficient position with quieter motors. The neighbour has no objections and no complaints since we have been opened. The councils decision will mean the premises can no longer be a restaurant and unfortunately the premises lease does not allow the building to be used for any other purpose thus the site will permanently lie empty.
[quote][p][bold]bragaboutbfd[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Avro[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]BB&B!![/bold] wrote: Of course he though the flues would be ok this place used to operate as a Little Chef? I think that was it, it was certainly a food outlet.[/p][/quote]If you digest what the council say, they are talking about new flues installed rather than existing flues of old. Basically the new owner installed flues in new locations, which makes them intrusive and could now case odours for residents. Had he retained the existing flues in the same locations, there would not have been a problem or breach![/p][/quote]The article didn't suggest the flues had been moved, and the owner said they were not doing anything new with them, other than perhaps upgrading them (which you can assume would be the case, since the Little Chef was there a while ago). It could be argued that the newer flues would be quieter and more efficient than old ones due to technology advances? But you never know. Either way the facts remain: - I much prefer seeing a running business in what was a total eye sore for years, right at the gateway to the city and the council should do whatever they can to support the business. Nothing seems to say what a mess of a city when you have a big boarded up building just as you come off the motorway - It seems like the neighbour, the person who you could argue is most likely to be affected, has no objections, then there must be at least some argument against the councils decision - You cant argue that there is a noisy motorway and 24 hour petrol station at the same location, and as pointed out it was a Little Chef and Burger King previously - so the arguments saying there will be noise and fumes once again, sound strange....unless of course the new extractors are of course big oversized mammoth monsters, installed to go with the american theme (i doubt this though) - Are the job losses accurate, exaggerated or attempted blackmail as some have implied? Well who knows, but it is likely that this business does employ staff and there is a business now where there hasnt been one for years...and so simple maths would suggest job losses if the business closes! I do hope the council supports this business and offers advice and helps them remedy the situation - it didn't seem clear from the article, if the flues were too big, in the wrong place or this place can simply no longer be a food outlet (or a combination). It would be a shame for the council to force them to close and we go back to the eyesore that was there previously. The city is in such a state, that hopefully the council wont be against giving businesses some care and personal attention if required - they dont seem to be doing much else right now! (sorry council but I will always find it justifiable to say things like that as long as we have a big hole, empty shops and a city which to most is in a pretty poor state in terms of retail at least, all under your watch).[/p][/quote]The flues have been upgraded & relocated to a more efficient position with quieter motors. The neighbour has no objections and no complaints since we have been opened. The councils decision will mean the premises can no longer be a restaurant and unfortunately the premises lease does not allow the building to be used for any other purpose thus the site will permanently lie empty. Hanqs diner

10:59am Fri 13 Dec 13

ivegate says...

As a complete neutral, fair play to Hanqs diner for responding so quickly and openly.
As a complete neutral, fair play to Hanqs diner for responding so quickly and openly. ivegate

12:10pm Fri 13 Dec 13

Ahrmen Aleg says...

ivegate wrote:
As a complete neutral, fair play to Hanqs diner for responding so quickly and openly.
Here Here and the responses confirm what a complete shower in process the wannabies in the planning department are.

I believe the builder of the houses on the site next door was stalled for years with issues with the council.

There is practically nothing left for Bradfords future, predicted 50 per cent population to be under 25 in 10 years.
When there is NOTHING left at all in Bradford it will be too late.

I fear that day is already here.
Whats left are hanging on
[quote][p][bold]ivegate[/bold] wrote: As a complete neutral, fair play to Hanqs diner for responding so quickly and openly.[/p][/quote]Here Here and the responses confirm what a complete shower in process the wannabies in the planning department are. I believe the builder of the houses on the site next door was stalled for years with issues with the council. There is practically nothing left for Bradfords future, predicted 50 per cent population to be under 25 in 10 years. When there is NOTHING left at all in Bradford it will be too late. I fear that day is already here. Whats left are hanging on Ahrmen Aleg

12:45pm Fri 13 Dec 13

Andy2010 says...

Wish there still was Burger King there.

None now in Bradford
Wish there still was Burger King there. None now in Bradford Andy2010

1:54pm Fri 13 Dec 13

Mixter says...

Andy2010 wrote:
Wish there still was Burger King there.

None now in Bradford
Maybe its the one shortly moving to Keighley?
Much needed as well, as we are very short of fast-food outlets here. Sometimes you can walk a whole street without finding one.
[quote][p][bold]Andy2010[/bold] wrote: Wish there still was Burger King there. None now in Bradford[/p][/quote]Maybe its the one shortly moving to Keighley? Much needed as well, as we are very short of fast-food outlets here. Sometimes you can walk a whole street without finding one. Mixter

3:21pm Fri 13 Dec 13

Prisoner Cell Block A says...

Hanqs diner wrote:
Albion. wrote:
This place seems to feature every few months, last time it was late opening. Other places carry on for years without repeated newspaper reports. Is someone just trying it on here? (which seems to be coming normal practice in Bradford).
It has been almost two years when we were in the paper regarding late opening. Despite many objections especially from senior labour councillors, the independent planning committee saw sense in our application and approved it at the dismay of the councillors. Since that time all applications have been rejected and also refused the opportunity to present our case to the planning committee. Just to add. All the fears the objectors had, have never been realised.
That would neither confirm nor deny my thought that maybe someone from the McDs franchise across the road had a 'friend' on the panel.

Best of luck in getting this through, try talking in a funny voice like Fozzie Bear, the muppets that run Bradford may understand you then.
[quote][p][bold]Hanqs diner[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Albion.[/bold] wrote: This place seems to feature every few months, last time it was late opening. Other places carry on for years without repeated newspaper reports. Is someone just trying it on here? (which seems to be coming normal practice in Bradford).[/p][/quote]It has been almost two years when we were in the paper regarding late opening. Despite many objections especially from senior labour councillors, the independent planning committee saw sense in our application and approved it at the dismay of the councillors. Since that time all applications have been rejected and also refused the opportunity to present our case to the planning committee. Just to add. All the fears the objectors had, have never been realised.[/p][/quote]That would neither confirm nor deny my thought that maybe someone from the McDs franchise across the road had a 'friend' on the panel. Best of luck in getting this through, try talking in a funny voice like Fozzie Bear, the muppets that run Bradford may understand you then. Prisoner Cell Block A

3:40pm Fri 13 Dec 13

Andy2010 says...

Mixter wrote:
Andy2010 wrote:
Wish there still was Burger King there.

None now in Bradford
Maybe its the one shortly moving to Keighley?
Much needed as well, as we are very short of fast-food outlets here. Sometimes you can walk a whole street without finding one.
But NO-ONE can make a burger like a burger king....well aside from making them at home
[quote][p][bold]Mixter[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Andy2010[/bold] wrote: Wish there still was Burger King there. None now in Bradford[/p][/quote]Maybe its the one shortly moving to Keighley? Much needed as well, as we are very short of fast-food outlets here. Sometimes you can walk a whole street without finding one.[/p][/quote]But NO-ONE can make a burger like a burger king....well aside from making them at home Andy2010

10:50pm Tue 17 Dec 13

Vaikona says...

Hanqs diner wrote:
arm grab man wrote:
Would the council prefer it to be a vandalised building or maybe the owner should take a leaf out of the councils book and copy there examples like broadway or the odeon or the town centre as a whole .
As for these " massive extractorsso the building was a Burger King and a Little chef. then someone built some houses nearer to the property it is now not allowed to carry on as a restaurant? I doesn't make sense. when these people look into buying their properties it will have pointed out that there was a nearby premises with planning permission to prepare, cook and serve food! der! which came first... the restaurant of course! Shame on you Council!!
[quote][p][bold]Hanqs diner[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]arm grab man[/bold] wrote: Would the council prefer it to be a vandalised building or maybe the owner should take a leaf out of the councils book and copy there examples like broadway or the odeon or the town centre as a whole . As for these " massive extractorsso the building was a Burger King and a Little chef. then someone built some houses nearer to the property it is now not allowed to carry on as a restaurant? I doesn't make sense. when these people look into buying their properties it will have pointed out that there was a nearby premises with planning permission to prepare, cook and serve food! der! which came first... the restaurant of course! Shame on you Council!! Vaikona

11:31pm Tue 17 Dec 13

Hanqs diner says...

Vaikona wrote:
Hanqs diner wrote:
arm grab man wrote:
Would the council prefer it to be a vandalised building or maybe the owner should take a leaf out of the councils book and copy there examples like broadway or the odeon or the town centre as a whole .
As for these " massive extractorsso the building was a Burger King and a Little chef. then someone built some houses nearer to the property it is now not allowed to carry on as a restaurant? I doesn't make sense. when these people look into buying their properties it will have pointed out that there was a nearby premises with planning permission to prepare, cook and serve food! der! which came first... the restaurant of course! Shame on you Council!!It is true the site has operated as a restaurant since it was built. The site was purpose built by the little chef and then extended by Burger King. We do appreciate that there is residents living nearby, but there is no way any of these residents could honesty say that the flues cause any odours which worry them or any noticeable noise in relation to the area, busy duel carriageway and 24 hr petrol station. We actually repositioned the flues so that we could minimise the size of the motors so as to make the least amount of noise.
[quote][p][bold]Vaikona[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Hanqs diner[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]arm grab man[/bold] wrote: Would the council prefer it to be a vandalised building or maybe the owner should take a leaf out of the councils book and copy there examples like broadway or the odeon or the town centre as a whole . As for these " massive extractorsso the building was a Burger King and a Little chef. then someone built some houses nearer to the property it is now not allowed to carry on as a restaurant? I doesn't make sense. when these people look into buying their properties it will have pointed out that there was a nearby premises with planning permission to prepare, cook and serve food! der! which came first... the restaurant of course! Shame on you Council!![/p][/quote]It is true the site has operated as a restaurant since it was built. The site was purpose built by the little chef and then extended by Burger King. We do appreciate that there is residents living nearby, but there is no way any of these residents could honesty say that the flues cause any odours which worry them or any noticeable noise in relation to the area, busy duel carriageway and 24 hr petrol station. We actually repositioned the flues so that we could minimise the size of the motors so as to make the least amount of noise. Hanqs diner

11:45pm Tue 17 Dec 13

Vaikona says...

Hanqs diner wrote:
Vaikona wrote:
Hanqs diner wrote:
arm grab man wrote:
Would the council prefer it to be a vandalised building or maybe the owner should take a leaf out of the councils book and copy there examples like broadway or the odeon or the town centre as a whole .
As for these " massive extractorsso the building was a Burger King and a Little chef. then someone built some houses nearer to the property it is now not allowed to carry on as a restaurant? I doesn't make sense. when these people look into buying their properties it will have pointed out that there was a nearby premises with planning permission to prepare, cook and serve food! der! which came first... the restaurant of course! Shame on you Council!!It is true the site has operated as a restaurant since it was built. The site was purpose built by the little chef and then extended by Burger King. We do appreciate that there is residents living nearby, but there is no way any of these residents could honesty say that the flues cause any odours which worry them or any noticeable noise in relation to the area, busy duel carriageway and 24 hr petrol station. We actually repositioned the flues so that we could minimise the size of the motors so as to make the least amount of noise.The point is that there is an existing permission for a restaurant (in fact there used to be 2 = twice as much possible smells) the council is wrong here!!
I pass every day and there are no smells and yet I go past another restaurant on Sticker lane and I can smell it quite easily!
[quote][p][bold]Hanqs diner[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Vaikona[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Hanqs diner[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]arm grab man[/bold] wrote: Would the council prefer it to be a vandalised building or maybe the owner should take a leaf out of the councils book and copy there examples like broadway or the odeon or the town centre as a whole . As for these " massive extractorsso the building was a Burger King and a Little chef. then someone built some houses nearer to the property it is now not allowed to carry on as a restaurant? I doesn't make sense. when these people look into buying their properties it will have pointed out that there was a nearby premises with planning permission to prepare, cook and serve food! der! which came first... the restaurant of course! Shame on you Council!![/p][/quote]It is true the site has operated as a restaurant since it was built. The site was purpose built by the little chef and then extended by Burger King. We do appreciate that there is residents living nearby, but there is no way any of these residents could honesty say that the flues cause any odours which worry them or any noticeable noise in relation to the area, busy duel carriageway and 24 hr petrol station. We actually repositioned the flues so that we could minimise the size of the motors so as to make the least amount of noise.[/p][/quote]The point is that there is an existing permission for a restaurant (in fact there used to be 2 = twice as much possible smells) the council is wrong here!! I pass every day and there are no smells and yet I go past another restaurant on Sticker lane and I can smell it quite easily! Vaikona

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree