A CLAMPDOWN on businesses with outdoor seating areas in the city centre should be eased, the leader of Lichfield District Council has said.
Currently, a pavement licence is required, with the local authority offering this for free to those hospitality outlets in the city centre as part of efforts to create a “cafe culture”.
However, after officers visited local businesses, some were told that they would need to stop using the pavement outside their premises for tables and chairs due to them being in breach of legislation or not holding the licence.
Now the leader of Lichfield District Council has called on his colleagues to ensure efforts to enhance the city centre are not undone by over-zealous enforcement measures.
In an email sent by Cllr Doug Pullen to members of the regulatory and licensing committee – which has delegated powers to determine how officers deal with upholding regulation regarding outdoor seating – and seen by Lichfield Live he said:
“For several years, hospitality businesses in Lichfield have been putting tables and chairs outside of their premises, helping to create the cafe culture which sets Lichfield apart from many other nearby towns and cities.
“This should be welcomed, celebrated and further promoted, particularly as our high streets move away from retail and to an experience-driven offering.
“The Business and Planning Act 2020 aims to make obtaining a pavement licence even easier – unfortunately the Lichfield District Council implementation of this legislation appears to be having the opposite effect.
“While I believe we have been very helpful in terms of reducing the fee to £0 and making the application process as streamlined as possible, enforcement officers appear to be overly-focussed on a specific element of the legislation.”
The current guidance from the Department of Transport states that “in most circumstances, 1500mm clear space could be regarded as the minimum acceptable distance between the obstacle and the edge of the footway”.
But Cllr Pullen said the interpretation of this needed to be reconsidered in parts of Lichfield city centre.
“The phrase in the guidance ‘must have regard to’ is important here – it does not mean ‘slavishly follow’, but instead means that the guidance must be taken into account and carefully considered.
“Having done so, there would need to be a good reason to justify not complying with it. I believe that in Lichfield, particularly in Bird Street and Bore Street, there exists a good reason to adapt the guidance for local needs.
“The 1500mm rule features heavily in Lichfield District Council’s correspondence with businesses, apparently ignoring the fact that in Market Street and Bird Street the footway and carriageway are entirely level with no dropped kerb creating an obstacle, and in some cases indistinguishable from each other, as well as being pedestrianised with access only available to delivery drivers and residents for the most part of the day.
“The practical effect of this is that wheelchair users and pedestrians simply use the entire highway. On the very odd occasion that a vehicle enters the pedestrianised area, people simply wait until that vehicle passes before carrying on.”
Cllr Pullen’s email also cited a business on Bird Street which would need to replace barriers which have been in place for 11 years in order to shrink the area by a total of 49cm it they were to continue using the outdoor seating space.
He said:
“This means new barriers must be purchased for several hundreds of pounds. If it is not, the business face having their tables and chairs collected by the council and stored at the cost of the business.
“This is just one example of many that I have heard from across the city.
“I accept that there is some element of interpretation in these rules, and that while I hold very strong views about this, it may not be shared across the council. Our officers are no doubt undertaking their work in the diligent manner which we would expect them to.
“I am not asking you [committee members] to follow and specific direction from me, but I do believe that there should be greater political oversight of this policy and approach to enforcement.
“While the regulatory and licensing committee have delegated the authority to determine in what manner to enforce this policy to officers, our constitution is very clear that the power is held concurrently by the committee, and therefore you have the ability to make an alternative determination of how these policies should be enforced as well as oversight of the policy.”
Cllr Pullen’s request for the committee to reconsider the “strict interpretation” of the 1500mm rule and give guidance to officers about “the manner” in which enforcement is expected to be discussed at a meeting in the coming weeks.
Thank you Cllr Pullen, some common sense at last!
Council busybodies rein your neck in! Are you trying to kill business in Lichfield?
City centre is already too small for the needs of today. Should move your seating else where and stop blaming others for your own lack of customers. The leader of the council should do some real work for change, such as finally seeing to the homeless crisis.
On another matter. Why does our Lichfield District Council office, have to redecorate year upon year at the expense of taxpayers?
First time in a while I agree with Doug… we should be supporting small businesses, not suffocating them with arbitrary regulations!
Just as I thought, I only walk into the centre now for an ‘experience-driven offering’
At last, a bit of common sense
If we listen to the likes of Local Man R.A then businesses will move their seating elsewhere (not “else where” btw)….. to another town/city
Also to correct Local Man R.A
Outdoor seating if anything, suggests the opposite of “lack of customers” or perhaps customers that want to sit outdoors
What on earth does redecorating have anything to do with this topic, must be a slow news day so you’re on your soap box.
I think we all want nice places to sit outside during the summer, but this should not be at the expense of pedestrians. Bird St. is a no-go zone for us. I refuse to take my grandchildren in their pushchairs that way to the park because we have to go in the road and dodge the vans, cars and lorry’s. We always used to stop for a rest and a drink at several cafes down there, and now we don’t. These businesses should start thinking of the community and not just their pockets. Goodness knows how the disabled and blind get around. Does the leader of the city council own some of these businesses?
Surely there needs to be some control over this so that people can still use the pavement? The city centre looks very unsightly with signs, poles, tables, chairs, adverts everywhere. The government guidance says
(Section 4.2 of Inclusive Mobility sets out that footways and footpaths should be as wide as practicable, but under normal circumstances a width of 2000mm is the minimum that should be provided, as this allows enough space for two wheelchair users to pass, even if they are using larger electric mobility scooters. Local authorities should take a proportionate approach if this is not feasible due to physical constraints. A minimum width of 1500mm could be regarded as the minimum acceptable distance between two obstacles under most circumstances, as this should enable a wheelchair user and a walker to pass each other).
So shouldnt it be 2000mm?
Make bird st a pedestrian st pavement width solved
I walk my dogs through lichfield every day and the biggest problem for me is having to move out the way for taxis , delivery drivers and other vehicles that shouldn’t be there !
I’ve always considered it very dangerous ground when a local politician interferes with operational functions. It’s generally considered to be a big No No.
Politicians are elected to create, adopt and oversee “Policies” and strategic objectives for their respective local authorities, not be involved in functional operations, especially those underwritten by statute.
Where that divide is not respected, “local government” invariably embarks on a downward spiral that is difficult to arrest..
Doug Pullen is talking sense for once. Some of the commenters here appear to be unaware that Bird Street is closed to motor vehicles except at restricted times for loading only. I hardly ever see vehicles when I walk or cycle that way. Meanwhile it would seem very strange to burden Lichfield’s existing cafes, bars and restaurants with unnecessary restrictions while handing over £1.7 million of council taxpayers money to persuade one national bar and restaurant chain to come to Lichfield in the vain expectation that it will attract more eating and drinking establishments to the city.
The problem with discretionary decisions is who benefits and who doesn’t? What precidents are established by such decisions and the rights of those who feel discriminated against.
It is not a situation where guidelines are appropriate. There are others who have right of way and access needs. These are public rights of way not unofficial extensions of businesses.
If there is dispensation for some sort of ‘coffee culture ‘ it should be contained within agreed parameters.