Agenda item
Update Report - Potential Enforcement Action, Homestead Farm, Main Street, Bothenhampton, Bridport, DT6 4BJ
Demolition of original farmhouse and erection of a dwelling not in accordance with planning approval WD/D/17/002888 as amended via the approved non material amendment approvals WD/D/19/000355/NMA and WD/D/19/000624/NMA.
Minutes:
The report was presented by the Enforcement Manager who
provided the same presentation that was given to the Committee at its meeting
on 10 September 2020 for the
benefit of newly appointed members of the committee who had joined since that
time.
He referred to the update sheet containing e-mails from the
applicants on 30 September and 7 October 2020 that had been circulated to
members prior to the meeting. These
e-mails confirmed that the site had been locked down and the keys handed back
to the applicants and that the site would be available to local residents for
parking during highway authority works to the high pavement. The applicants had
indicated that they would submit an appeal of the committee's decision in due
course.
The Enforcement Manager outlined the 3 enforcement options
below in full.
Option 1 – That no enforcement action be
taken at this stage.
Option 2 - That enforcement action be taken
requiring demolition of the whole building - this was not considered to be
expedient as the buildings were capable of being altered to more closely match
the approved building and therefore the proportionality of taking such action
needed to be considered.
Option 3 - That enforcement action be taken
requiring alteration of specific elements.
The Administration Assistant read out some of the written
representations in accordance with the public speaking protocol. All written representations received were
circulated to the committee prior to the meeting and are attached as an appendix
to these minutes.
In response to comments made during public participation,
the Enforcement Manager stated that the differences of the "as built"
and "as approved" schemes were marginal. However, the subjective nature of the issues
had been reflected in the public comments as well as differences in views of
officers and the committee. The fallback
position was the original permission as granted and therefore Option 1 meant
that the Planning Inspector's view could inform any enforcement action that may
be appropriate and was a more defensible position for the Council going
forward.
Members questioned the accuracy of the measurements provided
in the report as different figures had been provided as part of the
Non-Material Amendments (NMAs). They asked
how the Planning Inspector would assess the accuracy of these figures when they
may also be reliant on the drawings and measurements presented to them.
The Enforcement Manager confirmed that it was usual practice
for planning officers to rely on measurements provided by the applicant and how
this was dealt with going forward would depend on the nature of any
appeal. It was not unusual for a
Planning Inspector to bring measuring equipment to a site, however, if an
appeal resulted in a public inquiry then the measurements would be investigated
by the Council in proofs of evidence.
Members remained concerned regarding the varying
measurements and further highlighted that an appeal had not yet been submitted.
Councillor Bill Pipe proposed that in the absence of a
lodged appeal, that enforcement action was not taken provided that an appeal
was made by 15 November 2020. This would allow for a further report to be
considered by the committee at its meeting on 3 December 2020.
Proposed by Councillor Bill Pipe, seconded
by Councillor Jean Dunseith.
Decision: That the Committee agrees not to take
enforcement action providing that an appeal is made against the decision to
refuse planning permission by 15 November 2020. If no appeal is made by
15 November 2020 the question of enforcement action will be reported back to
the Committee at the earliest opportunity.
Reason for Decision
The Inspector’s view on any subsequent planning appeal will help to inform what formal enforcement action may be appropriate, if any, particularly noting that Inspectors often give a view in their formal decision letters as to which aspects of a development they consider acceptable, and which are not. By waiting for the outcome of any planning appeal, the Council will have a more defensible position as regards to any formal enforcement action it then decides to take.
Supporting documents:
- Update Report – Potential Enforcement Action, Homestead Farm, Main Street, Bothenhampton, Bridport, DT6 4BJ, item 24. PDF 495 KB
- Homestead Farm - Background Document 1 (Report to Committee 12 August 2020), item 24. PDF 578 KB
- Homestead Farm - Background Document 2 (Minutes of Committee 12 August 2020), item 24. PDF 453 KB
- Homestead Farm - Background Document 3 (Schedule of Works), item 24. PDF 105 KB