The Meeting will be open to the Press and Public during consideration of
the items set out in Part 1 of this Agenda.
1 DECLARATION OF INTEREST
Members are invited to declare any interest they may have in any of the items included on the agenda for this Meeting.
[Note: Any Member wishing to seek clarification as to whether it may be appropriate to declare an interest in respect of any item on this agenda should seek advice from the Chief Executive or Borough Solicitor at least one working day before the Meeting].
2 MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMITTEE HELD ON TUESDAY 7TH SEPTEMBER 2004
Previously circulated; Chairman to sign.
3 ENFORCEMENT ITEM: IDEAL CARPETS, NORTH ROAD, BERWICK-UPON-TWEED
• Continuing unauthorised operation of retail sales from former tyre depot in North Road;
• Previous applications for Certificate of Lawful Use or Development and planning permission insufficient and subsequently withdrawn;
• No further application submitted despite continuing unauthorised use;
• Enforcement proceedings now necessary to respond to issue
Purpose
To inform Members of a breach of planning control with regard to the premises at Ideal Carpets, 12 North Road, Berwick-upon-Tweed, TD15 1PL. The former National Tyre Depot.
Report
This report follows previous discussions and correspondence to/from the Planning Unit in respect of the planning history of the site and the submission of two applications from the current owners. These related to an application for a Certificate of Lawful Existing Use or Development (CLEUD), 01/B/0526, and an application for a Change of Use for the site, 02/B/0338, both of which were subsequently withdrawn. The agent acting for the owners has indicated that a further application for a CLEUD may be submitted however, despite efforts by the Planning Unit, an application has yet to be received.
The Land Use Gazetteer is an independent guide to land uses and their classes, but draws on government circulars, advice, official reports and legal decisions in the formation of its listings. This identifies a tyre-fitting place as B2 (General Industrial), while a tyre retailing and fitting place is classed as a sui generis use, as it incorporates a mixed use with no identifiable primary use. A Carpet shop is classed as A1 (Retail).
The business operates on the site of the former National Tyre Depot (sui generis). The site is currently used for the sale of carpets to the general public (A1), along with other non-related activities such as a Jet Wash, there has been no grant of Change of Use.
Members may wish to consider whether enforcement action should be pursued, pending receipt and determination of any further applications, which may be submitted. It is not generally considered best practice to enforce against a breach of planning control, when an application is being considered by the Local Planning Authority, that is directly related to the breach that is occurring however, the promised application has yet to be submitted. Given the location of the use away from the town centre, it is appropriate that any application is accompanied by a relevant assessment to consider the impact of the use upon the town centre.
If members consider formal enforcement action expedient, a Stop Notice, may be served prohibiting the sale of goods. This would need to be served in conjunction with the serving of an Enforcement Notice against the breach of planning control and preventing the unauthorised activities continuing. This power is discretionary and normally only contemplated when a use is in clear breach of planning controls and creating a severe amenity problem. The serving of a Stop Notice would also require a “cost/benefit” assessment, to examine the foreseeable costs to the operator and the benefit to the amenity of the area, which is likely to result, this has not been undertaken at this date. A Stop Notice is also open to claims for compensation.
Another alternative is to serve the standard Enforcement Notice, without the benefits (immediate cessation of the use) and pitfalls (claims of compensation) of the Stop Notice, requiring the unauthorised usage to cease. In the circumstances, it is considered that this would be a more appropriate means of enforcing against the unauthorised use.
Members are invited to consider the above issues and to decide whether they would wish to pursue any enforcement action that may be expedient.
Implications:
Environmental and Sustainability:
Nil
Equal Opportunities:
Nil
Crime and Disorder:
Nil
Best Value and Best Practice:
The use of enforcement powers, when considered expedient accords with Best Practice.
Financial/Legal/Personnel:
1. Officer time to draft and issue an Enforcement Notice/Stop Notice.
2. Officer time to conduct a cost/benefit analysis required for the issue of a Stop Notice.
3. Possible legal implications concerning possibility of a claim for compensation.
Recommendation: To issue an Enforcement Notice against the current use of the premises, requiring A1 trading to cease.
• Housing development granted planning permission in 2001;
• Conditions attached requiring highway improvements, including resurfacing;
• Development completed, and houses occupied, but conditions relating to highway improvements not complied with;
• Members’ views on appropriate course of action sought.
Purpose
To inform Members of an apparent breach of planning control with regard to the grant of planning permission 01/B/0474, conditions 12, 13 and 14 of which required road improvements to Union Street, Seahouses.
Report
Planning permission was granted in October 2001 for the erection of seven houses on land between Union Street and Taylor Street in Seahouses. The development was originally undertaken by AFD Developments Ltd, John Duffy acting as agent.
Three permissions were extant on the area of development at the time of commencement of works however; it is believed that planning permission 01/B/0474 was implemented:
Condition 12 stated:
No work shall commence on the development site unless a scheme to improve the carriageway and footway(s) on Union Street has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority, and thereafter, the works shall be completed prior to the occupation of the first dwelling.
Reason: To secure the proper development of the site and to provide a safe pedestrian route to the public highway.
The work commenced and was completed without the Local Planning Authority (LPA) discharging the condition or pursuing its implementation.
No bond was required by or offered to the LPA, for the works to be completed.
Condition 13 stated:
All roadworks and associated works eligible for adoption shall be laid out and constructed in accordance with the Northumberland County council Manuals or as agreed with the Highways and Transportation Manager.
Reason: To achieve a satisfactory form of development in the interests of highway safety.
The development was completed without the discharge of the condition by the LPA, nor did the LPA pursue compliance with the condition.
It is not believed that Northumberland County Council (NCC) would be in a position or willing to adopt the roads, if completed to the adoptable standard. However, it is the wish of NCC that the condition is enforced .
Condition 14 stated:
No development shall be commenced until a fully dimensioned layout plan incorporating road drainage, street lighting and landscaping together with a longitudinal section of the new road and details of the construction of the carriageway, footpaths and accesses has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority in consultation with the Highways and Transportation Manager.
Reason: To achieve a satisfactory form of development in the interests of highway safety.
A scheme was not submitted to the LPA, nor was the condition discharged and compliance with the condition was not pursued by the LPA, prior to the commencement of or during the construction of the development.
The Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (the Act), states that the grant of a planning permission relates to the property not an individual. The properties appear to have been sold on to private individuals. If this is the case and because the conditions would apply to the property, regardless of who owns it, the residents of the development would be held responsible for and have to be approached to effect, compliance with the conditions.
If Members consider enforcement action is expedient, to effect compliance an Enforcement Notice requiring compliance with the conditions could be served under sec.172 of the Act. The recipients would have the right of appeal, which would have the effect of suspending the requirements of the notice, until determined.
Members are invited to consider the above issues and to decide, whether they believe enforcement action to be expedient.
Implications:
Environmental and Sustainability:
Nil
Equal Opportunities:
Nil
Crime and Disorder:
Nil
Best Value and Best Practice:
The use of enforcement powers, when considered expedient accords with Best Practice.
Financial/Legal/Personnel:
Land registry searches for owners of the properties
Recommendation: To consider whether enforcement action to remedy the breaches of condition would be appropriate.
5 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL
*** To consider those applications for planning permissions on the enclosed list and such further planning applications as the Chairman may deem urgent.
Members are reminded of their responsibility to sign the Attendance Sheet in compliance with the Rules of Procedure.
