68a Harold Street Grimsby, DN32 7NQ Lawful use application

May 2023

Lawful Use Certificate Application.

68a Harold St Grimsby, DN32 7NQ has been used as class B1 for over 10 year from the date of this application. All these uses are now grouped into the new class E.

The purpose of this application is to assert the lawful use of the building in question within the remit of Class E thorough the established continuous use and the passage of time without any planning enforcement action. The last planning application was in 1978 and this was approved as storage B8 of antiques, as we will see this use had been clearly long obsolete after 45 years. It As wee will see the evidence shows that the antiques shop used the premises as a retail unit and it was their only shop. Also proof of that is presented in Annex ( ).  This application was made and approved as 45 years ago (at the time of writing), The building was then converted into a retail use of second hand furniture , antiques and various items from  the 1990s onward  The building continued its already established use as Retail of various good including vehicle parts and other uses within the scope of Class B1.

As we will see the whole property had been used for within the Scope of B1 use for over the past 10 years continuously and no planning enforcement as been had ever been in place during this period. There had not been any planning enforcement at all even prior to these past 10 years.  Additionally there had no planning control enforcement for the past 45 years since the last planning application was approved in 1978. Therefore all terms not only are met but exceeded.

The above are the legal grounds in which the certificate of lawful use is sought. In short we are invoking  the 10 year rule in absence of planning enforcement.

 

Use history of 68A Harold Street and the historical change to Class B1 Use. 

The last planning application was in 1978 with the approval for class B8. This is clearly obsolete as we will see all throughout this report. First of all not many councils have records of planning applications dating back  more than 20 or 30 years making the established use of the property its material use  independent of what the last approved planning application was at any point in time in the past  as long as this was more than 10 years prior (and the change of use was uninterrupted for over 10 years without planning enforcement in that given period).

The intention behind the  10 year rule is exactly to resolve the issue of outdated planning use of building that over long period of time have changed use without triggering a planning enforcemnt and (hence not cuasing real concerns), while allowing the correct established use to be duly legalised. This is exaxctly the case of the  68A Harold Street becuase the last planning permission was in 1978 (change of use to B8) and use B8 this is completely out of place and it has nothing to do witht the material long established use of the prorperty.

In this particular it is very clear that a granted planning application dating back over 45 years is no longer be relevant but also the material use of the property changed to B1 over 30 years earlier (in the 1980s). As in this case the last planning application granted is now clearly irrelevant with its current material use established over 30 years and now irrelevant. Several properties have no planning history and in those cases the planning use is established based on its most recent lawful use, and this is our case given how far back the last approved planning application goes (45 years).

In the absence of of any recent planning application being granted within the past 10 years (in this case in 1978, 45  years ago) it is reasonable to rely on the established use of the property to determine the material use of the property under a planning stand point.

As we will see the use of the building evolved naturally into class B1 over the years. This process started in the 1980s and was already well established in the 1990s as seen with Bell Antiques use of the premises as a retail facility in Annex (). They transitioned into class B1 and used the premises as retail store Class B1A. Bell antiques had their only premises throughout their trading history in 68A Harold Street therefore it is only natural that they used the premises as a retail store especially since, not only was it their only facility but at the time there was no option of effective online commerce, therefore for the business to survive, the business needed sales which took s place from the premises 68A Harold Street which was centrally located and in a residential area with plenty of footfall for its sales operations from their store in 68A Harold Street (Their only premises, therefore they could not have sold their merchandise from any other facility). Additionally the open layout of 68A Harold Street and the visible frontage of the building from Harold street made it and still makes it today, an ideal retail location.

When the new ownership of the premises took place (in 2007) a planing application was made to change use to class B1, however as discussed at length the use as class B1 was very well established  at the time already due to the passage of time and that application was rightfully withdrawn because it was unnecessary due to the premises established use. Ne new owner ate the time of the application made in 2007 for change of use was not aware of the length of the established use of the premises as retail Class B1A but after he become aware of the overwhelming evidence he rightfully withdrew his application as it was not necessary due to the long already established use at the time.

Central Location.

The central location of the building renders the building suitable as a Class B1 rather than a storage unit. A central location has an inherent demand for retail facilities in the area due to customer demand and footfall. In particular the central location of these 68A Harold Street offers easy central access, visibility  and footfall ideal for retail use. A class B1 is suitable for a residential area instead of  an industrial class B8 or B2 which would nowadays be out of place and create nuisance in a residential area and against several planning policies. Therefore as we will see extensively later on Harold Street is not the area suitable for a B8 or B2 building for several reasons.

Residential Area. The residential Area creates a natural Retail type of demand that rendered this building suitable for this class use and naturally evolve into B1 use.  Class use

Front Visibility in the Residential Area. The frontage of the unit is very visible, prominent and approachable from harold Street very good for attracting attention from the local passer-by (local foot fall and local drivers).

Layout of the building. As discussed later on the layout of the building renders it  suitable to the class B1 rather than B8 or B2 which require open space and very high ceilings this is because for industrial use building an open internal space is paramount for carrying out normal industrial usage of  the industrial operations. the current ceilings heights of the ground floor and top first floor make the building layout not suitable for the modern use as B8,  B2 and sui-generis.

For more on the unsuitability of Class use B8 and B2 to the building 68A Harold Street. This topic is discussed in detail in” ” This is a further reason for the building change use to class B1 which is the most useful and adequate use for  the building as seen later on.

 

 

The Evidence of the established use though passage of time.

For the purpose of this application it has to be only proven the continuous use over the space of ten years from the date of the application as no planning enforcement has ever taken place.

 

Evidence 1

Managing Agent Witness Statement. Annex1. This alone is a very strong evidence because this is a signed statement from the party who had control over the use of the premises since 2010 Was Lovelle Bacons Chartered surveyors. Also if you look a the picture of the building you can see the sign of the managing company on the front of the building.

 

Evidence 2

Various Witness Statements asserting the materiel use of the premises over the span of 10 years as Class E. Evidence is provided by pictures verified by withes statements as well as the very state of the building including the current use as vehicle parts sale unit. The witness statements not only confirm the use of the building but also provides picture evidence of the state of the building since 2010. In 2010 the sign Jaylee Motors was displayed the the front of the property . Jaylee Motors engaged in the retail sale of motoring spare parts, this is further proof of the use of the premises as retail the then equivalent to class E today. The retention of the sign Jaylee motors today is further evidence of its established use, of course the sign would be changed if the use were different. This sign was present ion both buildings and at the front access of the same as it is used for the same purpose as retail of motoring parts. Retail use of vehicles spare parts. Motor parts shop no repairs. The picture evidence alone is strong proof of the use of the unit as retail (Class E use). The proof of the picture date is done through witness statement, therefore the witness statement are for proving the use as well as proving the date of those pictures.

 

Evidence 3

The witness statement dated 2018 also confirms the same use within Class B1, in particular B1(c). Since December 2017. Please note that this witness statement is sworn and it is completely independent from this application. It i s one of the evidence we managed to find  about this property. The purpose of this witness statement of 2018  is in connection with a prosecution case back in 2018 and not this application. It is also important o emphasize that the witness in this document was not aware of the planning application made in 1978, upon the independent assessment of this Chartered surveyor the use of the building was as a Light industrial/workshop (Class B1c), There must not be any confusion because reference is made only to the type of activities as per definition of former Cass B1c (See terms of use of the promises by Lovelle Bacons Chartered Surveyors annex 1) As seen the use as workshop/ light industrial needed not to have any impact of n the residential neighborhood (hence within the remit of Class b1c). In fact this statement is not in contradiction with the terms of use of the premises as B1c. By all means it is important to note that the retail use of the premises was the predominant one however the purpose of the survey report was not to establish the use of the premises, but it was in connection with a prosecution case. It is likely that the events that lead to the prosecution at that time caused the building to be reconfigured temporarily so that the Chartered Surveyor focused her/ his attention on the light industrial use Class b1c which may have been more apparent at that particular time due to extraordinary events that lead to the prosecution case. Also as we will see if any use was made as light industrial in a residential area this was as per class B1c also due to the lack of complaints from the residential neighbourhood. Once again the scope of the sworn witness statement was not to witness the use of the premises at the time, but it was in connection to a prosecution case therefore the professional surveyor did not focus his/her attention on the full use of the promises at the time.

Evidence 4

Statement By the Chartered Engineer Antonino Russo. This is from a Chartered Engineer with over 50 years experience in international building appraisals.

 

Evidence 5

Photographic evidence proving the use of the building as a retail store prior to 2010 by Bell antiques. Note this is not strictly  necessary but it does provide evidence of the very long established use of the building as class B1

 

Evidence 6

The use as B8 not only is obsolete (not in use for over 30 years) and not relevant to the building but as seen, not compatible with the Residential Area. Not compatible with the size of the Road, not compatible with the layout of the building, not compatible withe the Entrance of the building and against a good number of planning policies  the Areas. This is explained in detail in “Unsuitability of B8 as use class for the building and unsuitability in the residential area.” and “Unsuitability of the building layout and Unsuitability of Harold Street to accommodate the Modern Class B8 and B2 Class use building.”

 

 

In case there might be confusion between the Sporadic use of part of the building as light industrial B1c which was not continuous over the years and call B2 please take into consideration all the declarations (in particular the declaration of the managing Agent as of the use of the building), and also please refer to “Unsuitability of the building layout and Unsuitability of Harold Street to accommodate the Modern Class B8 and B2 Class use building.”

 

All the evidence proves the use of the premises as class E not only continuously over the past 10 years but beyond the 10 years requirement. We deem the evidence submitted overwhelming to grant the certificate of lawful use as Class E.

Therefore given that

1 no planning enforcement had been carried out in the past 10 years and longer.

2 all the documentation presented here constitutes compelling evidence which prove the continuous use over the span of more that 10 years of uses all consistent with CLASS E.

3 also circumstantial evidence, including the layout of the premises, the entrance unsuitable for LGVs, Size of Harold Street, Lack of LGV parking space. Impossibility of maneuvering LGVs backwards and more, shows the unsuitability of the building as Class B8.

4the lack of complaints from the adjacent neighbouring residential area also shows that if any light industrial activities they where consistent with the definition of Class B1(c). Also as seen these light industrial uses were  sporadic in nature and therefore not continuous and clearly in line with Class B1(c) as light industrial in a residential area.

5 The premises were used as a retail unit also in the 1990s and 2000s as demonstrated. The use that Bell Antiques made of the premises as retail  is clear due to the  evidence still available on public records.

This application meets all the tests to obtain lawful use certificate for its current actual and historical use for over 10 years as required by the applicable legislation.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Suitability of the established material use (of 68A Harold Street) as B1 to the Residential neighbourhood

The unit is clearly located in the middle of a residential Area as seen in the map presented with the application. Additionally this can also be verified by consulting any independent map record the council holds. This is self evident given the location of the premises.The building is a commercial unit  surrounded by residential dwelling houses class C3. Therefore its most suitable use as a  commercial unit in a residential area is Class E. Historically the houses surrounding 68a Harold Street have been strictly class c3 for over 50 years.  The absence of planning enforcement is further evidence of the correct Classification as class E as of its long established use. In fact if it were used as class B2 it would have caused nuisance to the residential neightbourhood and therefore triggered a planning enforcement.

The historical use of the premises 68a Harold Street had been as a retail unit demonstrably for over the past 30 years. Due to the information we have very likely for even longer than 30 years. The layout is a complete  open space with exception of a relatively small office area it has been ideal for retail use (circumstantial evidence of its historical and current established use). Additionally its central location in a residential area made it ideal as a retail unit.

Form the planing History of the building we can see that the last application was for a change of use to B8 made in 1978. After that the last application was in 2007 for a change of use from B8 to B1 and D1 this was withdrawn in 2008. The reason behind the withdrawal of the application for change of use to B1 and D1  (Both Class E today) in 2008 was due to the already long established use over time of the premises as  class B1. Circumstantial evidence and searches in connection with this building prove the use as a Retail/ light industrial B1c/ workshop B1c for well  over 30 years continuously and not just the 10 year rule as per legislation requirement, therefore the criteria for established use are exceedingly met they were in force even before 2008.   This shall be more than enough passage of time without planning enforcement to establish its lawful use.

Also as a note about class B1 this is clearly compatible for the location of the building 68A Harold Street since the building in question is in a residential area. A B2 use of the building would be incompatible with the area as it could cause disturbance to the neighbouring residential dwelling class c3. Therefore it is clear that the use as B2 would have not been in line with the residential area the building finds itself in. A B2 use would have been not well suited with this residential neighbourhood and complaints would have arisen in connection with it over the span of over 40 years. Hence over the span of 40 years a class B2 use would have very likely triggered a planning enforcement. Therefore if over 40 years  use there had not been planning enforcement it is clear that any past small workshop element use of the building was is in line with B1c class and therefore in line and symbiotic with the residential nature of the neighborhood.   Also the use as B1 is more suitable for the residential area as it does avoid the increased traffic of a storage and distribution centre that would be located inconveniently in this residential area.

 

Unsuitability of B8 as use class for the building and unsuitability in the residential area.

On the contrary Class use B8 (Storage/distribution centre) is an unsuitable purpose in a central location in the heart of a residential area. Class B8 use of a building of the scale of 68A Harold Street would cause heavy High load trucks to constantly access the area Harold Street. This would be detrimental to the area. The area can handle normal traffic but heavy high load traffic with the addition for the non availability of parking space for high weight trucks would make it not functional and cause issues to the neighborhood.

The old application for B8 in 1978 could have been suitable to a storage unit 45 years ago however nowadays, given that storage units  of this scale are used by  highly efficient and busy fulfillment centres the use of 68A Harold Street as B8 would make it detrimental to the area. This likely was not the case in 1978 (45 years ago), given the radical different nature of storage unit and commerce which was mostly localised in 1978. What likely happened in the 1980s is that the use of the premises 68a Harold Street naturally evolved from storage to retail (See Annex  as evidence of this) and the retail use of the premises took over completely in the 1990s, as this was the best use  of the premises given its central location, the residential area it found itself in and the internal layout. The lack of noise complaints and lack of planning enforcements  demonstrated the suitability of the site as its long established current use as B1 (now incorporated in class E). Additionally by its use class nature Class B1 and E are of low noise as intended to be reserved to be a business class use to be located in a residential area and serve serve the residential area. Class B8 and b2 on the contrary are meant to be confined in a business industrial complex away from residential dwellings class c3.

It is a fact that the B8 use is obsolete and unsuitable for both the area, size of the road, the overall configuration of the building and  the entrance configuration of the building. The demand for warehouses in 1978 and their type of use have changed dramatically due to the way technology have developed.

Warehouses  and distributions centres are now built well away from a residential area in business parks grouped with other class B8 or class B2 buildings. Also they are built for purpose with the most efficient internal configuration.  , with appropriate roads that can handle the wights of  LGVs.

Distribution centres have space for LGVs parking.

The Sixe of the roads hare adequate for these large vehicles.

. Roads that are designed to hadles the heavy constant LGVs traffic. Normal roads deteriorate fast if used by LGV constantly.

There is space for LGVs maneuvering

The entrance ifs appropriate tfor off loading and loading the LGVs

No planning policy would allow a new application for change of use to class B8 or B2 in a residential area.

The entrances of class B* building are also made to at the right hight and with ramps fo the forklifts can easily drive into the LGV loads to effiently load and offload gthe goods. Several entrances to the B8 building are made intot he building for efficient loading and offloading.

Warehouses are nowadays are mainly used by internet companies and other large corporate entities that handle high volume of business which naturally leads to a constant heavy traffic with Very High Weight long trucks going to site and parking close the site on a daily basis. Also these high wight vehicles  have to park onsite and enter the load into the premises a normal storage unit modern operation. The use of building as class B8 nowadays would also be incompatible to the area and very likely not only cause nuisance to the dense residential neighbourhood but additionally block traffic (this these Large High weight trucks needing to access the site and park there).

 

 

Unsuitability of the building layout and Unsuitability of Harold Street itself to accommodate the Modern Class B8 and B2 Class use building.

Class B8 and B2 should be confined to industrial estate areas (business park) not placed in the middle of a residential area. Additionally the opening of the frontage property is not suitable for the use class B8 of modern storage and distribution centres because  it would require  major structural works to render it suitable for the entrance of LGVs distribution trucks. As it is evident from the front picture of 68A Harold Street the entrance is not high enough to accommodate the usual LGV load. Additionally the building has only one entry and not multiple entries  as B8 distribution centres have. The impossibility to have multiple entries for the LGV load makes this building uncompetitive and not suitable compared against class most B8 buildings in business parks, which in turn have multiple entries and easy access to LGVs plus ample parking for LGVs.

The LGV truck load could not be left parked outside the premises anywhere in Harold street, or in the vicinity as it would impede normal traffic as it would block one lane even if it were parked on the pavement.

Also even if major works were done to the entrance of 68A Harold Street to make the entrance suitable for the LGV truck load entrance, the backwards maneuvering of the LGV load truck would not be possible (due to the size of Harold Street) and hence the truck load would not be able to enter the premises anyway. If the truck load cannot enter the building this renders building not suitable and noncompetitive for this B8 use as storage unit in the open market place.

After all companies when it comes to class b8 building are not looking for a central Lotion in a residential area (destined to class E as the established use of 68A Harold Street) but instead for a building that can be easily accessed and built for purpose. Unfortunately  68A Harold Street  is neither accessible by LGVs,  nor fit for purpose not does it have suitable LGV parking.

In case of 68a Harold Street the building is not built for purpose and the toad size does not accommodate this type of use. The unsuitability of the premises for a normal storage and distribution centre is further indication that its use as such would be impractical.

The unsuitability of the building for class B8 is further proof that its material use in more in line for the requirements of the area, the layout of the building which is more suitable as a retail unit and all uses within class B1.

Therefore the old use granted in 1978 as a b8 not only would be detrimental the the area and an impractical use of the premises nowadays 45 years after the application was approved. But since it is impractical and detrimental the use of the building changed in the 1980s to B1 a more suitable class to the residential are it finds itself in.  Additionally if a change of use of the building would be made to either B8 or B2 today this should  not be seen favourably and resisted by the planners given all the above, especially the fact that B8 and B2 are industrial uses which should be confined into an purely industrial area and not in the backyard of class c3 terraced house where the  68a a Harold Street building is situated. Also as we will see below the use of 68A Harold Street as B8 or B2  would be against a good number of planning policies current in force.

 

Use of 68A Harold Street as class B8 and B2  against current planning policies. 

On the contrary a class B1 (incorporated into Class E) is suitable to a residential area (where the building finds itself in). In fact class B1 in the spirit of the law was thought to be suitable as it is a class use compatible with a residential area, however both B2 and B8 are class uses for industrial purposes and unsuitable for a residential area Like Harold Street. As we have already seen, this is one of the several reasons  for the use of the building to naturally evolve into B1 use over time in the 1980s and  already established in the 1990s , and on top this, despite this natural change of use, this was no cause of concerns  over the years by the neighbourhood.  This is because Class B1 (and today class E) are meant to be a suitable business class to be placed in a residential area and to also serve the residential it is in.

Also former ClassB1 and now Class E are suitable for a central location like Harold Street from a planning policy view point. In Harold street and close vicinity not only there is no need for Class B2 and B8 use (Heavy industrial reserved for business parks) but this heavy industrial use is detrimental to the centre for several reasons some of which we have already explored. B2 and B8 are also clearly not compatible with the current planning policies due to their nature as seen below.

 

Notwithstanding all the above class B2 or B8 would be against local planning policy 22

Policy 22
Good design in new developments
1. A high standard of sustainable design is required in all developments. The Council will expect
the design approach of each development to be informed by:
A. a thorough consideration of the particular site’s context (built and natural environment,
and social and physical characteristics);

68A Harold Street is not a good design for the Class B2 and Class B8 use as seen in previous sections, this is as seen due to its internal layout, the residential area it is in, the size of the Main Road, Lack of LGV parking, Impossibility to outmaneuvering back of LGVs loads and other matters already discussed at length in “Unsuitability of B8 as use class for the building and unsuitability in the residential area.” and ” Unsuitability of the building layout and Unsuitability of Harold Street itself to accommodate the Modern Class B8 and B2 Class use building.”

Most of all  class B8 or B2 use would not be in the correct site’s context because 68A Harold street is literally surrounded by Class C3 dwellings and in an overall residential neighbourhood.

Therefore maintaining the building in its current established use Class E, clearly is in line with policy 22 point 1A. Clearly policy 22 does favour use Class of the building as E  and clearly disfavours use class B8 and B2 in the context of the residential area the building is in.

 

A use B8 or B2 would also be against policy 32.

Quote:

Policy 32
Energy and low carbon living
1. Where appropriate, the principles of the energy hierarchy

Generally, from a planning stand point  Class E building allocated within a residential area is supposed to serve the area reducing travel to those services that Class E provides within its scope. If a Class E building would not be in the residential area the average travel of the residents would be longer defeating the low carbon living initiative of policy 32. For example it is more practical to have a retail fancily you can access next door instead of a distribution centre that does not serve the residential neightbourhood and the residents have to travel further to access similar retail units which would otherwise be close.

In our specific case, the appropriate class E (in current use and established use) of 68A Harold Street reduces the average travel of the residents in the vicinity of the building as Class E offers the services required by the residents , Whereas a class B8 or B2 would

Use Class B2 and B8 would not be of use to the residents of the area. Therefore the residents would require extra travel to reach the same types of services necessary to them. therefore increasing the average day to day  journeys as it would deprive the area of a building class use E which is required by the residents anyway. In fact if the building use would bot be class E the residents would increase their  average travel to assess the same services offered within the scope of Class E further away form the area. Also as you can see from the map the area does indeed benefit from its current class use E as without 68a Harold Street in current class E use the area would be deprived of  Class E services with no exchange for new residential housing. Therefore the class use B8 and/or B2 would increase the average travel of residents to access their services and therefore decrease the efficiency and convenience of the area blatantly against the low energy living policy 32.

2  detrimental to the area for the reasons seen above, is LGV traffic unsuitable for the area noises etc

 

Policy 36
Promoting sustainable transport
1. To reduce congestion, improve environmental quality and encourage more active and healthy
lifestyles, the Council will support measures that promote more sustainable transport choices.
Where appropriate, proposals should seek to:
A. focus development which generates significant movements in locations where the need
to travel will be minimised;
B. prioritise pedestrian and cycle access to and within the site;

1 Class B8 increase congestion due to the need of High Weight Trucks to access the area on a daily basis. This causes the road to be blocked by LGVs which need to park on the road in order to off load their cargo into the building. The LGV Load cannot enter the building due to the size oft he street that does not facilitate backwards maneuvering and the size of the entrance.

On the contrary the retention of a Class E building as per its existing established use decrease congestion by comparison avoiding the use of the of high Load Long trucks (LGVs) accessing the area on a daily basis. Therefore the retention of Class E would have the usual normal vehicle parking and traffic in the area.

As seen the possible use of the building as B8 or B2 not only is not suitable for the area but goes against several current planning policies therefore should a application for change of use from current existing use class E to B8 or B2 it would be recommended for refusal on several grounds, including several planning policies.

 

The current  class E Classification Attracts Highly Skilled professionals to the area

Notwithstanding the fact that the use as Class E has been amply proven It is important to emphasise the fact that its use as such attracts highly skilled professionals to the area, increasing the overall standards, balancing the community, decreasing crime rate, improving the residential area as a whole.

This is because use class E includes services that attract more employment and higher skill sets into the area in comparison with class B8 use. This is because  B8 and B2 use take advantage of more automation and large scale operations requires less personnel and of lesser expertise. Modern storage and distribution centres are relying on storage management system and automation which all requires less personnel and less expertise.

A percentage of the personnel who serve class B8 building are LGVs drivers who are transient in nature. The work required in class B8 building is usually of lower skill levels to  the requirements of a Class E building due to the types of services offered to the residential  neighbourhood.

Therefore the retention of the building within class E attracts talent and more highly skilled population in the area which would be promoting regeneration as well  as business and residential investment in the area>Hence by default c significantly contributing to the regeneration of the area , which deems to be clearly in need of it.

Attracts highly skilled labour into the area and the city centre. Therefore the increase in skilled labour in the area decrease crime and deprivation in the area and the city centre of Grimsby.

Class B8 building Type of employment

LGVs Drivers (transient to the area in nature)

Forklift drivers

Packers Warehouse workers

Site Manager/Security

Class E type of employment.

Offices (suitable to the residential area) Lawyers, Estate Agents, Secretaries, SMEs Startups, Technology companies,  Sales professionals, Graduates, students, Scientists etc

Class B1(b) Postgraduates working in research

 

Annnex 1

Managing Agent(Chartered Surveyors) Statutory declaration.

Managing agent signed for submission

Signature captured by cognito forms, email confirmation of authenticity and confirmed by witness.

 

Annex 3

Witness statement in connection with a prosecution case.

Witness Statement

 

Annex

Prior to 2010 the premises where used as retail store by Bell antiques.

As we can see from the screenshot Bell Antiques was operating a retail shop from Harold Street and this was prior to 2010. Retail was the materiel use of the premises even prior to 2010. Please note that Bell antiques only premises throughout their trading history was 68A Harold Street therefore it is only natural that they used the premises as  a retail store especially since, not only was it the only facility but at the time there was no option of effective online commerce, therefore for the business to survive needed sales which took s place from the premises 68A Harold Street which was centrally located and in a residential area with plenty of footfall for its sales operations from their store in 68A Harold Street (Their only premises). This evidence is below and it may still still be found here https://www.alladdress.co.uk/company-address-phone-email-UK-online/second-hand-shops/2206986/bell-antiques-68a-harold-street-south-humberside-grimsby

kkkk