Agenda item

Further to minute 69 of the North and East Plans Panel meeting held on 1^st October 2015, where Panel received an update report on the latest situation in respect of continuing works to implement the approved scheme for a four bedroom detached house incorporating basement accommodation (part retrospective), to consider a further update report

(report attached)

  Further to minute 69 of the North and East Plans Panel meeting held on 1^st October 2015, where Panel received an update on the works to implement Application 14/00575/FU at 56 The Drive Cross Gates LS15, Members considered a further report of the Chief Planning Officer.  A Members site visit had taken place earlier in the day

  The Chair raised a preliminary matter relating to speaking on enforcement cases as the public speaking protocol for Plans Panels was silent on the issue of speaking on enforcement cases.  A request to speak had been received from two Ward Members and the applicant had been notified of this but had not attended or nominated a representative to speak.

The Chair sought the view of Panel as to whether to allow the Ward Members to speak, with Panel agreeing to this

  Officers then presented the report

  Plans and drawings were displayed at the meeting

  Reference was made to the progress updates which Panel had requested at the previous meeting and the further works which had taken place since 1^st October 2015

  Members were advised that the temporary solution in respect of the doors was due to the applicant’s desire to install underfloor heating

The discrepancies between what was on site and the approved plans were outlined in relation to windows, with Officers advising these differences would not impact on the amenity of neighbours and that the differences could be dealt with by a non-material amendment to replace the agreed plan with the one displayed at the meeting, if Members were accepting of this

  The Panel then heard from Councillor P Gruen who outlined continued concerns about this matter, which included:

·  the nature of the applicant and that previous guarantees he had given had been reneged upon

·  that no certificate of completeness had been provided

·  the quality of the works which were being undertaken on the property

·  the longstanding nature of this case and the need for it to be satisfactorily resolved for the residents who had endured this situation for many years

·  the need for the Council to maintain the pressure on the applicant to bring this matter to a close

The Panel also heard from Councillor P Grahame who stated that the

way in which local residents had been affected by this matter should be taken into account.  Concerns were also raised about the safety of the structure, particularly in the event of severe weather

  Members discussed the matter with concerns being raised about the approach which had been taken by Planning Officers in this case; the seeming acceptance of elements of the scheme which might have been refused on other schemes; the length of time this matter had been continuing and the need for Officers to follow up on works relating to landscaping and internal works.  Concerns were also raised about who would live in the property and that the Council had a strategy to deal with unoccupied properties.  Concerns were also raised about the untidiness of the site; the quality of the building and the lost revenue to the Council from Council Tax, in view of the length of time this matter had been ongoing.  Members sought clarification on what options were available to the Panel in respect of trying to bring the matter to a resolution

Members were informed that it was the applicant’s intention to move into this dwelling and that in terms of the wider site, there were planning conditions relating to landscaping

  The Panel’s Legal Adviser referred to Counsel’s advice and suggested the Panel might need to go into private session.  Discussion took place on the reasons for this, with Members being informed that legally privileged advice from Counsel would be considered and further legal advice might be required.  A copy of the advice obtained from Counsel was circulated to Members by the case officer

  The Panel considered this issue and passed the following resolution:

  RESOLVED -   That the public be excluded from the meeting during discussions on this matter as if members of the public were present there would be disclosure to them of exempt information as designated as follows:

  Discussions referred to below and information comprising Counsel’s advice under Schedule 12A (3) Local Government Act 1972 and the terms of Access to Information Procedure Rule 10.4(5) and on the grounds that there would be disclosure of information in respect of which a claim to legal professional privilege could be maintained.  It is considered that if this information was in the public domain there would be potential legal implications in respect of the information discussed

  The public withdrew from the meeting at this point

  Members discussed the current position as seen on site and possible options to resolve this long-standing matter.  The Panel’s Legal Adviser outlined Counsel’s advice; the terms of the Unilateral Undertaking and referred to the further works which had been carried out by the applicant.  Mention was also made to an issue referred to in Counsel’s advice regarding taking action directly affecting the applicant

  Councillor R Grahame brought to the Panel’s attention at this point that his wife was involved in this matter through being a Ward Member

  The Panel’s Lead Officer sought to explain the rationale in accepting the scheme before Members, with reference to the applicant’s fallback position and advised that the discrepancies could be dealt with by a non-material amendment which could be brought to Panel, although it was the view of Officers that no harm to residential amenity and the streetscene arose through these alterations

  The Panel discussed the issues with the key points relating to:

·  the advice sought and obtained from Counsel

·  the costs incurred by the Council so far in dealing with this case

·  the issuing of a final certificate in full and timescales related to this

·  non-compliance of the Unilateral Undertaking in respect of not achieving a practical completion as defined

·  the comments made and the way forward, having regard to Panel’s previous resolution regarding demolition

At this point, the public were readmitted to the meeting

Members continued to discuss the matter with concerns being raised

about the amount of work remaining and aspects of the building which were not in accordance with the approved plans; the quality of the work being undertaken from a public safety perspective and the need for the Council’s Building Control Section to carry out an inspection of the building, with a special meeting of the Panel being arranged to consider the findings of this inspection

  The fairness of Officers in dealing this case was recognised but the view was expressed that the good nature of Officers and Ward Members had been taken advantage of and that in this case, the interests of the local residents had not been best served

  The possibility of undertaking a Scrutiny Inquiry into Planning Enforcement was raised as was further consideration of the public speaking protocol by Joint Plans Panel

  Members considered how to proceed

  RESOLVED – i) That due to non-compliance with the applicant’s Unilateral Undertaking in respect of not achieving practical completion (as defined), to proceed with arrangements to effect the demolition of the property

  ii) That the Chief Planning Officer be instructed to arrange for Council Building Control Officers to visit 56 The Drive Cross Gates LS15 within 7 days of this Panel meeting due to safety concerns and report back to a special meeting of North and East Plans Panel on 12^th November 2015

  iii) That action be taken in respect of tidying up the site including consideration of the serving of a S215 Notice