A CHAII tea stall is a “threat to the safe and free flow of traffic” - according to planning officers.

Bradford Council has refused a retrospective planning application to retain a unit next to Aunt Betty’s Fish and Chip Shop on Little Horton Lane.

The business Chaii Wali, has been operating out of a trailer unit next to the fish shop since last summer, without planning permission.

Earlier this year Aunt Betty’s Chip Shop submitted plans for a stand alone tea kiosk and patio area.

But now planning officers have refused that application, saying it fails to provide enough parking. They say the business is already causing traffic issues on the already busy road.

Inspector dismisses Summerville Road business' planning appeal

And highways officers say poor parking around takeaways in this area and other parts of Bradford is a “noted problem.”

The business is the latest in a string of new chaii tea cafes - many of which have opened up in similar kiosks in car parks.

A similar retrospective plan for this site was refused last year.

Two people had objected to the plans, raising concerns about parking, litter and noise.

Highways officers said although some parking was offered, this was shared with Aunt Betty’s.

They added: “Given the nature of the use, it is unlikely that customers would make use of this parking.

“It has been suggested that a 15 minute waiting sign could be used, as the intention is for customers to stop and go, but this firstly could not be enforced by the local authority and it is the transient high frequency nature of the use that exacerbates the highway safety concerns.

“It is noted in the representations that indiscriminate parking is already occurring as a result of the presence of the current kiosk.

“This is a noted problem around hot food takeaways where the anticipated short nature of the trips gives rise to indiscriminate parking within close proximity of the use irrespective of restrictions.

“Whilst the contravention of parking restrictions would be controlled by the police, planning permission should be resisted where the use would place greater pressure on the highway network that will likely give rise to conditions prejudicial to highway safety.

“Therefore, notwithstanding the restrictions in place, the development is considered a threat to the safe and free flow of traffic due to the lack of suitable and sufficient off street parking.”

Environmental health officers had acknowledged the objections relating to noise - but said this could be mitigated by putting restrictions on the business’ opening hours.

Refusing the application, planning officers said: “The development fails to provide sufficient and suitable off-street car parking provision.

“As such the proposed development would result in greater on-street car parking to the detriment of the safe and free flow of traffic on the highway. For this reason the proposed development is unacceptable.

“It is acknowledge that the outlet may play some role in the local community, but its role can only be limited given the nature of the operation. It is also accepted that there will be some employment benefits from its operation, but again these can only be on a limited scale. The social and economic benefits associated with the development do not therefore outweigh the above concerns.”