Controversial massage parlour plans to go before committee

City planners in Sheffield have recommended that consent is granted for a change of use application, which would see a vacant unit in Langsett Road, Hillsborough, turned into a premises offering “massage and spa facilities.”

Those objecting to the plans, which are set to be considered by Sheffield Council at a planning board meeting this afternoon, say that they have concerns about the nature of the business in question.

They say the proposed opening hours, of 11am until 11pm every day of the week, suggest that the business could be used as a brothel rather than as a bona fide massage parlour.

Roger Sutton from the South Yorkshire Housing Association said: “SYHA is opposed to the application because we believe the proposed business will be detrimental to families living at Cuthbert Bank.

“We are anxious that families with young and teenage children, through living so close to the premises, will be vulnerable to exploitation by the sex trade and from customers using the massage parlour.” Another objector, who lives in nearby apartments, said: “The planned hours of the business are highly anti-social and will run late into the night in a predominantly residential area.

“These hours are not in keeping with the usual business hours of legitimate health and beauty establishments.”

They added: “We genuinely feel that approving this application will result in the area being adversely affected by a business which is not in any way suited to this community.”

Other objections have been raised on the grounds of a potential increase in traffic and possible parking problems in an already-congested area.

Opponents also say that such late opening hours could create noise late into the night.

Planning officials, however, have advised councillors to approve the change of use application as, under planning law, “moral objections are given little weight in decision-making.”

The planners’ report, which will be considered by council members today, says: “This is reflected in various appeal decisions, where planning inspectors have set aside any moral objections and focused upon the effect of the living conditions of nearby residents.”

They also say that the applicant has agreed to revise their closing time to 8pm, rather than 11pm, to “balance residents’ concerns regarding the impact of the proposal from the perspective of noise and disturbance.”

The planners add that as the building is small and only has three rooms, it is “unlikely to generate an undue number of people arriving and exiting the premises.”

One letter of support has also been submitted to Sheffield Council, from a neighbouring business.

They say: “Although I’m not a resident, I do spend all day at the garage next door to the address, and would welcome the passing trade brought by the customers.

“Also, the later opening hours of such a business would provide extra security for neighbouring properties.

“I cannot see any problems caused by noise, parking or anti-social behaviour.

“Overall, it would be good for the area.”

In their report, city planners conclude that “whilst the concerns of local residents are acknowledged and understood, it is determined that this application must be considered on its merits.”

They say: “There are insufficient grounds...to conclude that the amenity impact deriving from the proposed activity would be so detrimental to the adjoining residents, given the scale of the proposal and the amended hours of opening and privacy arragements, to warrant a refusal.”