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 9TH NOVEMBER 2004
• Advises Members of a breach of planning control at 36 Castle Terrace, Berwick-upon-Tweed.
Purpose
To inform Members of a breach of planning control with regard to the creation of an access onto a classified road without consent at 36 Castle Terrace, Berwick-upon-Tweed
Report
On the 22nd June 2004 it was brought to the attention of the Planning Unit that an access had been created at 36 Castle Terrace. On investigation it was found that an additional vehicle access had been created for which planning permission had not been granted. Castle Terrace is classified as the A6105.
The access has been cut through a random rubble stone wall and located on a bend in the roadway.
Correspondence with the owners has proven they now know of the need to submit a planning application and indicated willingness on their part to apply however, an application has not yet been submitted.
The owners of the property have quoted a letter from Northumberland County Council (Highways) concerning a previous application for the erection of a detached dwelling on the property. This application was refused. This letter suggests that an additional or ideally the existing access would require vision splays, however it does not in itself grant planning permission or explain the need for two means of access to a single property from/to the same road.
The owners have asserted the original access may have been difficult to use and have raised safety concerns over its use. Even if this is so, this form of development would still require planning permission.
Members are invited to consider the above issues and the expediency of enforcement action.
Implications:
Environmental and Sustainability:
Nil.
Equal Opportunities:
A right of appeal to an Enforcement Notice does exist and if exercised would have the effect of suspending the notice until determined.
Crime and Disorder:
Nil.
Best Value and Best Practice:
The use of enforcement powers when considered expedient is considered Best Practice.
Financial/Legal/Personnel:
Officer’s time to draft, issue and monitor compliance with an Enforcement Notice, should it be issued.
Recommendation: To issue an Enforcement Notice under section 172 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, requiring the re-instatement of the boundary wall and access, adjacent to the A6107, to its condition prior to the unauthorised development.
• Informs Members of a breach of planning control on land to the West of Donaldson’s Lodge.
Purpose
To inform Members of a breach of planning control with regard to the erection of a polytunnel on land to the West of Donaldson’s Lodge.
Report
Sometime prior to 6th June 2004 a polytunnel was erected on land West of Donaldson’s Lodge. The site had previously been related to railway use. The land did have outline planning permission for the erection of a dwelling until 1999, when a renewal was refused due to a change in policy. This decision was upheld on appeal.
The polytunnel has been erected on an area of land triangular in shape, and is bordered to the West by a public footpath (Cornhill-on-Tweed/10), to the North by the old railway line and to the South by the A698. The land is undergoing a degree of landscaping by the owners including tree and hedge planting, the erection of fencing and a vegetable plot has been planted.
Precedent indicates that a polytunnel is considered to be development depending on principles related to size, method of fixing to the ground and degree of permanency. Precedent further indicates that permanence need not be 365 days per year.
The polytunnel measures 11.7m x 4.4m (38’5” x 14’5”) and is fixed to the ground by metal spikes which would appear to be intended as permanent.
Communication with the owner of the polytunnel has resulted in him agreeing to remove the structure with a view to it being re-erected with the relevant planning permission at a later date. However, no date has been given for its removal and the structure is still in place at this time.
The polytunnel by virtue of its size, method of fixing to the ground and the fact that it has been in place for five months with no firm date supplied for its removal is development and would require planning permission.
Members are invited to consider the expediency of issuing an Enforcement Notice.
Implications:
Environmental and Sustainability:
Nil.
Equal Opportunities:
A right of appeal to an Enforcement Notice does exist and, if exercise, would have the effect of suspending the notice until determined.
Crime and Disorder:
Nil.
Best Value and Best Practice:
The use of enforcement powers, when considered expedient, is considered Best Practice.
Financial/Legal/Personnel:
Officer time to draft and serve an enforcement notice and officer time to monitor compliance with it.
Recommendation: To consider the issue of an Enforcement Notice under section 172 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 to effect the removal of the polytunnel.
• Informs Members of the result of consultations letters sent to residents of Union Street, Seahouses.
Purpose
To inform Members of the result of consultation letters, required by the Planning Committee meeting of 5th October 2004, sent to residents of seven addresses on Union Street, Seahouses regarding the possibility of a financial contribution to the upgrade of Union Street.
Report
Letters were delivered by hand to all addresses within the development on the 8th October 2004. Three written and two telephone responses were received.
All responses were to the effect that residents involved would be unwilling to financially contribute to a road upgrade required by what they perceived as a council failure in the first instance.
Implications:
Environmental and Sustainability:
Nil.
Equal Opportunities:
Nil.
Crime and Disorder:
Nil.
Best Value and Best Practice:
Nil.
Financial/Legal/Personnel:
Nil.
Recommendation: To invite Members’ views on the expediency of further action.
• Informs Members of the result of the situation concerning Ideal Carpets.
Purpose
To inform Members of the situation concerning Ideal Carpets, North Road, Berwick-upon-Tweed.
Report
A six-week period was granted to the owners of Ideal Carpets at the October planning Committee meeting, to enable a planning application to be submitted for the continued use of the premises within an A1 Use Class. The Planning Unit received an application, for the grant of a Certificate of Lawful Use or Development, on the 4th October 2004.
This type of application requires the applicant to present the necessary evidence for the determination of the case however; no such evidence has yet been received by the Planning Unit. As the burden of proof lies with the applicant and repeated attempts to speak to the agent by telephone, in an attempt to gain this information have not resulted in a reply, the application cannot be determined.
Implications:
Environmental and Sustainability:
Nil.
Equal Opportunities:
Nil.
Crime and Disorder:
Nil.
Best Value and Best Practice:
Nil.
Financial/Legal/Personnel:
Nil.
Recommendation: To invite Members’ views on the expediency of further action.
7. 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.
