• FROM your Letters pages over recent weeks, I note the differing opinions of readers on the streatery, and the words: “There was no consultation over the use of the village public space” ring loudly in my ears.

Well, I am here to unravel the dark art of tables and chairs licensing for your readers.

The government eased the requirements for al fresco dining by reducing the consultation period for tables and chairs to be placed on the public highway to one week.

Unlike other planning applications the council are not required to put up the familiar yellow planning application notices.

The responsibility of placing notices is placed upon the applicant and notices must be displayed on the windows of all those named on the licence application.

I only saw one displayed, which was so nondescript it would hardly attract the attention of a passer-by. There may have been others.

When an application is finally tracked down on the council’s website all you will find is the application form and a plan of the tables and chairs placement. You will not see any residents’ comments, as you would with a normal planning application, although comments may have been made.

Hmm, so you find that odd! Even more odd is that the decision to grant the tables and chairs licence is taken in camera by Camden licensing officers, and then, and then only, will you see the actual terms of the licence.

The other question the streatery raises is the question of council funding from which residents are also excluded. Here’s what was granted: £10.5k from each of the three council wards that surround the village £31.5k in total.

Money comes from the Community Infrastructure Levy, the sum developers pay as part of their planning applications and must be spent locally; the decision to grant funds on this occasion was taken in camera and signed off by councillors.

There is also a question of further funding being granted by councillors for the benefit of the streatery, taking the total to £56k.

This is a large sum of public money for the placement of 44 tables and 88 chairs in the village which equates to £1,273 per table and two chairs.

Take a look/listen at the interview below, and is it any wonder that the future use of Belsize Village has come under the spotlight? https://assets.bwbx.io/av/users/iqjWHBFdfxIU/vskFkrWM7ANs/v4.mp3.

Those who have contacted me or those with names on the copious emails that I have seen fully understand the need for our local businesses to be given a boost and succeed. I have not seen one comment which is anti the streatery.

What local residents are concerned about is the after-pandemic use of the village. They are simply looking to take part in consultation, as the streatery quietly snuck up on them without the opportunity to comment.

The majority of local councillors have not picked up on this and, in fact, have taken the long-grass approach by not listening and not replying to emails. To describe concerned residents as “a miserable bunch” or “the awkward squad” is derisible.

Councillors, you will do well to take note, as many of those you are ignoring are bright folks with some very good new ideas involving all sectors of village life to start a consultation rolling. Remember a number of them live in and around the Belsize Village and you don’t.

How about £56k for the cost of the consultation?

CHRIS KNIGHT
Belsize Crescent, NW3