Agenda item

That planning permission be granted subject to the conditions detailed in the report of the Chief Officer (Planning and Environment) with condition 1 amended to require the works to be carried out within 6 months and condition 8 to require the removal of the hardstanding outside the defined area, before grassing the site

The Committee considered the report of the Chief Officer (Planning and Environment) in respect of this application.  The usual consultations had been undertaken and the responses received detailed in the report.

            The officer detailed the background to the report and said that five letters of objection had been received which were detailed in the report. 

            Councillor Alison Halford proposed the recommendation for approval which was duly seconded.  She referred to the cancellation of the site visit at short notice.  The Development Manager apologised to Councillor Newhouse and the Committee for this.  Councillor Owen Thomas said that there was no reason not to approve the application but said that there was a need for a turning area on the site. 

            The Local Member, Councillor Tim Newhouse, explained that he had met with the applicant in 2011 and had indicated that he had no objection to the application as long as no hardstanding was laid and that natural screening was put in place by the applicant in a straight line back from the boundary between numbers 25 and 27 and that the area be re-grassed.  On the strength of the assurances from the speaker for the applicant at the December 2011 Planning Committee meeting that the site would be properly maintained and that screening would be provided, the application had been approved by the Committee.  In April 2012 hardcore was dumped on the site which was contrary to the permission that had been granted and since then, the applicant had submitted and withdrawn numerous planning applications to prevent her having to restore the site.  A site visit had taken place in May 2014.  Councillor Newhouse felt that any hardstanding on the site should be grasscrete and should not extend beyond the boundary between numbers 25 and 27 in a straight line.  He felt that any outcome other than refusal of the application would set a precedent to allow applicants to not undertake permissions in line with conditions imposed. 

            Councillor Ray Hughes concurred with the comments of Councillor Newhouse and said that the hardstanding area had destroyed the field.  Councillor Derek Butler raised concern that the applicant could be granted permission and then fail to comply with what had been approved.  He felt that the matter should be referred to the Enforcement Team.  Councillors Richard Lloyd and Richard Jones referred to the application which had been submitted and refused in May 2014 which was now the subject of an appeal. 

            In response, the Development Manager said that the appeal submission was not relevant to this application as what was in place was unauthorised and this application was to seek a solution.  It was proposed that the area of hardstanding would be reduced to an area which was deemed to be the minimum required for turning vehicles using the site and this was equivalent to the area referred to by Councillor Newhouse.  In order to reduce the visual impact, a condition had been added for a hedge to be planted along the eastern fence line of the hardstanding.  A condition for the removal or grassing over of the hardstanding outside the application site was also recommended and if Committee considered that this should involve the removal of the hardcore then the condition could reflect this.  The Development Manager added that if the applicant did not comply with the conditions then the issue would be referred to enforcement. 

            Councillor Richard Jones queried whether the decision was premature as the appeal had not yet been heard and asked why officers were more confident that the conditions could be enforced.  The Development Manager said that the permission and conditions recommended to Members provided a firm basis for enforcement if the conditions were not complied with.  The amount of hardstanding which would remain was considered by officers to be a reasonable compromise.  Councillor Jones also asked whether an area of hardstanding had been included in the approval granted in 2011 and added that if what was agreed in 2011 had not been complied with, then it should be referred to enforcement. 

            In summing up, Councillor Halford said that this proposal was deemed acceptable by officers and that she was satisfied that the applicant would do what was required of her or face enforcement action.  She queried whether condition one needed to be strengthened.  The Development Manager suggested that it be worded to allow a period of six months to undertake the works required by the conditions. 

            RESOLVED:

            That planning permission be granted subject to the conditions detailed in the report of the Chief Officer (Planning and Environment) with condition 1 amended to require the works to be carried out within 6 months and condition 8 to require the removal of the hardstanding outside the defined area, before grassing the site