This takeaway wants to expand in Glasgow - but people aren't happy
Planners at Glasgow City Council have recommended Raja's Pizza Bar's application is given the go ahead by councillors next week.
They say the proposal to expand into 244 Albert Drive will bring an empty shop back into use.
Nine objections to the proposal have been made however, with concerns raised over increased traffic and road safety issues as well as more noise and public health problems such as litter, pests and cooking fumes.
One neighbour said there is 'already a significant problem with cars parking in the middle of the road or on pavements to use the existing takeaway'.
'This parking creates a single lane for both directions of traffic, resulting in bottlenecks, and it also obscures the view for pedestrians crossing the road, posing a significant safety risk, not least for the children and parents who use Pollokshields School located on Albert Drive.
'I fear it is only a matter of time before a serious, fatal road accident occurs involving a child returning from school.'
Another resident said the proposal would have a 'detrimental effect on the area', including increased noise, traffic congestion and illegal parking.
They also claimed it would lead to the 'exacerbation of currently inadequate waste storage provision', presenting a 'health and safety hazard'.
One objector said he believes the plan will create 'a lot of mess on the pavements' as well 'an issue of double parking during peak times'. It has also been suggested that the changes would lead to too many food and drink uses in the area.
In a report to councillors, officials state the unit has been empty since 2023 apart from a short period where it was used as an unauthorised takeaway. It adds five out of six commercial units in the block would be in retail use.
Planners also state access to the site 'remains unchanged' and the takeaway is within 'an area of high accessibility for public transport'.
They say changes, including to the shopfront, will 'preserve and enhance the character and appearance of East Pollokshields conservation area'.
The report states the existing opening hours will be applied and 'will not result in an unacceptable increase in noise and activity from operation of the business or customer use'.
It is recommended that a condition is attached to the permission to ensure the amalgamated shop shares the existing kitchen, preventing a second kitchen being installed, which could 'potentially generate significantly more fumes, noise and disturbance to residential amenity as a result'.
Officials have also reported solutions to the 'potential for increased environmental health issues' have been discussed and any issues will be 'addressed through environmental health processes by the council'.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Redding council decides Tuesday night if voters go to polls for sales tax increase
Redding City Council members will decide Tuesday if voters will go to the polls in November to approve or reject a citywide 1% sales tax increase. The council will vote to go forward or not with a resolution to declare a special election to decide the new tax measure's outcome. If it lands on the Redding ballot and voters pass the measure, sales tax in Redding would increase to 8.25% — up from 7.25%. That 1% would generate an estimated $30 million revenue bump per year, according to the city. The money is intended to cover public safety services, parks and infrastructure, the resolution said. That new revenue would go a long way to plug the city's approximately $5-million budget deficit hole, opened because current revenue streams have yet to catch up with repairs and maintenance costs for Redding's streets, buildings, parks and airports, City Manager Barry Tippin reported last April. The council meets at 6 p.m. in council chambers at city hall, 777 Cypress Ave. Note to readers: If you appreciate the work we do here at the Redding Record Searchlight, please consider subscribing yourself or giving the gift of a subscription to someone you know. The council added the issue to Tuesday's agenda after a citizens' group collected enough signatures to put the measure on the ballot last July. Shasta County elections officials counted 9,073 signatures in favor of placing the measure on the ballot. They'd validated 6,120 of those signatures as of July 21, City Clerk Sharlene Tipton said at the council's July 22 meeting; 304 more signatures than the 10% of registered voters proponents needed to put the measure on a Redding ballot. 'We live and work in the community and we are concerned about the shortfalls facing the city,' Redding Rancheria CEO and measure supporter Tracy Edwards said in April. We obviously want public safety and all the things the tax initiative is going to support.' If the city council approves putting the measure on the ballot, and Redding voters turn it down, it will be the third time a city sales tax increase fizzled at the polls in 11 years. Redding voters rejected similar tax increases in 2014 and 2016. Shasta County voters also passed on a public safety measure in 2020. California cities with 8.25% sales tax rates include Gridley in Butte County, Orland in Glenn County and Crescent City in Del Norte County. Chico (9.25%) to the south and Yreka (8.75%) to the north both have higher sales tax rates, according to the state. Record Searchlight reporter David Benda contributed to this story. Jessica Skropanic is a features reporter for the Record Searchlight/USA Today Network. She covers science, arts, social issues and news stories. Follow her on Twitter @RS_JSkropanic and on Facebook. Join Jessica on Record Searchlight Facebook groups Get Out! Nor Cal , Today in Shasta County and Shaping Redding's Future. To support and sustain this work, please subscribe today. Thank you. This article originally appeared on Redding Record Searchlight: Redding council considers 1% sales tax hike on November 2025 ballot Solve the daily Crossword
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Sector shaken as FCA opens consultation into £18bn scheme
The UK motor finance industry is facing fresh disruption after the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) confirmed plans to launch a consultation into a redress scheme that could cost lenders and brokers as much as £18 billion. The announcement — following a Supreme Court ruling last Friday — reintroduces significant financial and operational uncertainty for motor finance providers. While the FCA said most drivers would receive no more than £950 each, the total cost to the industry is now estimated at between £9 billion and £18 billion. Paul Hollick, Chair of the Association of Fleet Professionals (AFP), said: 'We've gone from a situation on Friday where the Supreme Court verdicts suggested the worst risks for the motor finance sector had been removed, to one on Monday morning where the FCA's intervention has reintroduced the possibility of quite widespread reparations.' The FCA's move relates to discretionary commission arrangements (DCAs), which allowed dealers to set interest rates on car finance agreements and pocket the difference as commission — often without the customer's knowledge. These practices were banned in 2021, but many were in place across millions of loans issued between 2007 and 2021. FCA Chief Executive Nikhil Rathi said: 'It is clear that some firms have broken the law and our rules. It's fair for their customers to be compensated.' He added that the FCA aims to build a scheme that is 'fair and easy to participate in,' with no need for consumers to use a lawyer or claims management company (CMC). 'If you do, it will cost you a significant chunk of any money you get,' he warned. Industry pushback However, several industry figures questioned the FCA's legal and practical basis for retrospective compensation — particularly when many firms operated within then-accepted frameworks. Paul Bennett, a consultant with Madox Square Advisory, was cited on LinkedIn as saying: 'This statement leaves me somewhat perplexed because, until discretionary charges were banned in 2021, financiers in concert with their introducers operated within the law. As such, how can firms be penalised in 2025 for what was accepted business practice until 2021?' Stephen Haddrill, Director General of the Finance & Leasing Association (FLA), expressed concern over the FCA's intention to look as far back as 2007. 'We have concerns about whether it is possible to have a fair redress scheme that goes back to 2007 when firms have not been required to hold such dated information, and the evidence base will be patchy at best.' Speaking to BBC Radio 4's Today programme, he added: 'I just think that is completely impractical. It is not just firms that don't have the details about contracts back then, customers don't either.' Dealers urged to review historical agreements Jonathan Butler, legal counsel at the Vehicle Remarketing Association (VRA) and partner at Geldards, said: 'We shouldn't lose sight of the fact that this is good news for dealers and lenders' given that the exposure is far less than the £44 billion feared. However, he warned of extensive preparatory work ahead. 'Dealers and lenders are now in a position where they can start to calculate their exposure. They should be tracking down all relevant paperwork dating back to the 2007 cut-off point,' Butler said. He also flagged potential legal minefields in legacy dealer agreements: 'Dealers need to read their old contracts with motor finance providers to check there is no form of indemnity in place that protects the lender in the event of claims of the type now envisaged. These did sometimes exist and, if enforced, may cause issues.' Butler added that the redress scheme could be hampered by evidentiary complexity: 'The Johnson-type threshold is actually a value judgment... These are highly fact sensitive matters and not questions that... could be easily answered using anything other than an arbitrary and automated process. It needs qualified people to make assessments... that is potentially an enormous task.' CMC industry faces collapse The FCA's announcement is also likely to have a profound effect on the claims management sector, which had anticipated a much wider liability ruling from the Supreme Court. John Perez, Partner and Head of Finance Litigation at DWF, said: 'The CMC industry that has emerged in pursuing these claims on mass will likely now collapse.' He explained that under the ruling, 'any continuing claims will all be fact dependant on the nature of the individual transactions,' meaning the days of high-volume, generic CMC-driven claims are effectively over. Perez noted the court's ruling in Canada Square v Johnson clarified that 'no disclosure of commission or partial disclosure of commission will not in itself render the relationship unfair.' Instead, courts must evaluate multiple factors — including the size of the commission relative to the total credit cost (as in the Johnson case, where it was 55%) and whether the dealer made misleading representations. He suggested the FCA may borrow from the approach taken in the PPI and Plevin redress schemes, potentially setting a commission threshold — such as 50% of the total charge for credit — above which redress would be automatic. Retail perspective: fairness and stability needed Sue Robinson, Chief Executive of the National Franchised Dealers Association (NFDA), welcomed the Supreme Court's judgment and its recognition of the sector's submissions. 'As the consumer facing part of the sector, NFDA want to see the regulator act fairly to ensure that UK consumers receive a satisfactory result. This has been achieved today,' she said. Robinson emphasised the importance of a stable retail environment, noting that 'automotive retail accounts for approximately 78% of the broader automotive workforce.' "Sector shaken as FCA opens consultation into £18bn scheme" was originally created and published by Motor Finance Online, a GlobalData owned brand. The information on this site has been included in good faith for general informational purposes only. It is not intended to amount to advice on which you should rely, and we give no representation, warranty or guarantee, whether express or implied as to its accuracy or completeness. You must obtain professional or specialist advice before taking, or refraining from, any action on the basis of the content on our site. Sign in to access your portfolio
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
Newcastle Struggle to Find Momentum as Summer Plans Stall
Newcastle's Summer in Flux as Transfer Plans Stall and Isak Uncertainty Grows Transfer Inactivity and Internal Instability Raise Concerns As Newcastle United approach the start of a new season, the momentum built through recent campaigns has stalled. The Athletic's in-depth analysis paints a picture of a club stuck between ambition and dysfunction, navigating the market while juggling absences in key executive roles. Darren Eales, diagnosed with blood cancer, is on medical leave. His replacement as chief executive has not yet been named. Paul Mitchell, the sporting director, has departed. 'It means, for the second summer in succession, there is a huge flux at the top of the club.' This kind of uncertainty can filter down. It has. Transfer activity has been sparse, with only two senior signings completed: Aaron Ramsdale arriving on loan from Southampton, and Antonio Cordero immediately loaned out. For a club that finished in Europe last season, this is not the kind of transfer window fans expected. Midfield Depth and Centre-Forward Vacancy Remain Problematic The decision to sell Sean Longstaff to Leeds United has left Eddie Howe's midfield options stretched. 'Having sold Sean Longstaff to Leeds United, Howe's options in midfield are thinner, particularly with Joe Willock now out for between four and six weeks with a calf injury. Ideally, there would be reinforcements here, too, although little has been ideal about this summer.' Photo IMAGO Reinforcements have not been forthcoming. In pre-season, the lack of an experienced striker has been exposed. William Osula and Anthony Gordon have filled in, but neither is equipped to lead the line long term. Howe has repeatedly said the club must act quickly in the market. Those words, uttered with clarity after clinching Champions League qualification, now seem haunting: 'We have to be ready to conclude things very quickly because good players don't hang around for long.' Newcastle's primary attacking target remains Benjamin Sesko. An initial €80m offer was rejected by Leipzig, but positive talks have taken place, with co-owner Jamie Reuben directly involved. That pursuit continues, though Manchester United remain strong contenders. Isak's Future Overshadows Squad Planning The transfer window's defining narrative at St James' Park revolves around Alexander Isak. Liverpool's £110m bid was rejected, falling £40m short of Newcastle's valuation. Isak trained away from the squad in Spain before returning to Newcastle's facilities. His attitude will dictate whether he is reintegrated or moved on. Photo: IMAGO As The Athletic notes, 'All roads lead back to Isak.' Howe's pointed comment, 'No player can expect to act poorly and train with the group as normal,' was broad, but the subtext was clear. If Isak departs, Newcastle's hand is forced. A new striker would be imperative, with Sesko becoming not just an ideal partner but a necessary replacement. And even if he stays, the squad needs depth. Infrastructure and Identity Questions Linger Off the pitch, Newcastle's long-term projects have slowed. There has been 'no tangible movement on a new stadium or training ground.' These aren't small matters. But the lack of visible progress undermines the club's wider vision, especially at a time when fans are watching other 'Big Six' clubs complete ambitious deals. Ultimately, this summer has been shaped by hesitation, disruption and missed opportunities. There is still time, but optimism is thinning. Our View – EPL Index Analysis For Newcastle fans, this summer has been deeply frustrating. After building so much momentum over the last 18 months, qualifying for Europe and showing genuine progress under Eddie Howe, it now feels like we've stalled. And not just stalled, but regressed. Losing Sean Longstaff, even for good money, made sense in isolation, but not without a plan to replace him. Joe Willock's injury just adds to the problems. The midfield is bare and there are holes all over the squad. The biggest concern is clearly up top. Isak is world-class, but if he wants out, we need clarity. Watching him train alone while Liverpool circle is uncomfortable. Either he commits, or the club moves him on and acts decisively. So far, we've done neither. We're also not blind to what's going on upstairs. The lack of a sporting director and CEO is affecting everything. Transfers are slow, targets are slipping through. This has happened before. The feeling is familiar. The fans will keep backing Howe, the players, and the badge, but the ambition needs to return. The window's not closed yet, but the clock is ticking louder each day.
