AN appeal to allow a new café to be built in Ben Rhydding has been dismissed by a planning inspector.

Earlier this year, Bradford Council refused a planning application to demolish a substation on Wheatley Lane in Ben Rhydding and build a coffee shop in its place.

Planning officers said the new business could cause traffic issues, and potentially damage a “majestic” Sycamore next to the substation.

They also questioned the loss of an electricity substation, and how it might impact electricity supply in the area.

Applicant Paul Milner of Golburn Property Management Ltd lodged an appeal against this refusal – meaning it would be up to a Government inspector to decide on the plans.

The appeal said the National Grid, which operates the sub station – had been briefed on the plans, and that the Council’s concern over electricity supply was “totally ridiculous.”

But after visiting the site planning inspector N Teasdale has now dismissed that appeal.

Their decision said: “Such a use, whilst only small in scale, would result in a greater level of traffic generation and parking demand from both deliveries and customers over and above that of the existing use.

“It cannot be assumed that most customers would be local and would not drive to the premises and, given the site’s relatively peripheral location I consider that unlikely.

“The proposed development would not provide any off-street parking and would be highly likely to result in cars and service vehicles utilising on street parking nearby including along Wheatley Lane. 

“At my site visit, whilst only a snapshot in time, I observed several instances where traffic queued up at the junction whilst the lights changed.

“I also observed that there is pressure for on street parking associated with the residential properties located on the opposite side of the road and there were a number of cars parked along this side of the road in close proximity to the junction.

“The increase in parking demand could result in cars/deliveries parking on the western side of the road close to the appeal site which would obstruct the flow of traffic associated with the nearby junction.

“I conclude that the proposed development would be prejudicial to highway safety.”

Referring to concerns about the tree, they said: “Although the proposed development may lead to some pruning of the canopy area given its spread over the appeal site, it would not be so substantial as to affect the long-term health and survival of the trees or their overall contribution to the character of the area.”