Agenda item

To formally report the receipt of a petition submitted in relation to an alleged Planning Enforcement Matter in Nelson Road, Clacton-on-Sea.

Minutes:

Earlier on in the meeting the Committee Services Manager (Ian Ford) had declared a personal interest in the subject matter of this item for the reasons outlined in Minute 55 above.

 

It was reported that a Petition, supported by 60 residents of Nelson Road, Clacton-on-Sea (plus 33 residents of other streets in Clacton), had been submitted in relation to an alleged planning enforcement matter in that street. The Petition called on this Council to urgently exercise its planning enforcement powers and to serve a Breach of Condition Notice on Lane Homes Construction Group for the alleged non-compliance with planning permission for the construction of nine ‘Town Houses’ at 6 Nelson Road, namely the alleged failure to make good the unmade pavement and drop kerbs. The Petition was worded as follows:-

 

“We, the under-signed, being concerned residents of Nelson Road, Clacton-on-Sea who are directly affected by the issue of the unmade pavement and drop kerbs, call on Tendring District Council, to urgently exercise its planning enforcement powers and to serve a Breach of Condition Notice on Lane Homes Construction Group in order to ensure that the contractor responsible for the nine new build houses makes good the unmade pavement and drop kerbs in Nelson Road that are required by the planning permission for this site.”

 

Planning Enforcement was a non-executive function and therefore the Planning Committee was the appropriate body to consider this matter.

 

The Committee was made aware that, in accordance with the Council’s adopted Scheme for Dealing with Petitions, the receipt of this Petition would be reported, for Members’ information, to the meeting of the Full Council due to be held on 22 November 2022. However, in view of the urgency of this matter, it had been felt appropriate by Officers to bring this petition to the first practicable meeting of this Committee for Members’ consideration.

 

In accordance with the Council’s adopted Scheme for Dealing with Petitions, the Lead Petitioner, Maria Monteith addressed the Committee, and outlined the reasons for the submission of the petition and what action the petitioners wanted the Council to take.

 

At the invitation of the Chairman, Councillor Griffiths, one of the Ward Members, similarly addressed the Committee.

 

The Acting Director (Planning) reported that, on 13 July 2022, Essex County Council had confirmed that the pavement issues and related highway matters subject to the Petition all fell under their jurisdiction and that they were liaising with the developer in that respect. Matters relating to dropped kerbs were outside of the curtilage, which formed the boundary of the site, and therefore not covered by planning conditions. In conclusion, the works were not subject to conditions that could be enforced as a breach of condition and were works in the highway that fell to Essex County Council to resolve and as necessary to enforce.  Tendring District Council could not legally address the situation as presented and did not have any enforcement power it could exercise.  Tendring District Council had respectfully asked Essex County Council to resolve this matter as soon as possible on previous occasions. 

 

On that basis, no action in planning terms could be recommended as a result of this petition and so it was reported without an Officer recommendation.

 

 

Outline of matters raised by Members of the Committee

Outline of Officer response thereto

Was this a condition of the planning permission? Why had it not been complied with?

Yes it was. The issue outstanding was the license for the construction of the drop kerbs, which was a County Council matter and not a matter for this Council. It had not been complied with as the developer had not yet been granted that licence by the County Council.

Who was at fault here? Was it the Developer or was it the County Council?

There was fault on both sides. The matter had taken much too long to resolve and it had now become a significant public issue.

If a member of the public had an accident traversing the land in question who would be liable? Would it be ECC Highways?

Yes, it would be ECC Highways as the land in question was highways land.

 

Having duly considered and discussed the matter:-

 

It was moved by Councillor Alexander, seconded by Councillor Harris and:-

 

RESOLVED that the Planning Committee instructs this Council’s Director of Planning to write, formally, to the Portfolio Holder responsible for Highways at Essex County Council to escalate this matter with a view to a speedy and satisfactory resolution – bearing in mind this is a matter that has been unresolved for in excess of a year and should have been concluded prior to occupation of the new homes.

 

The letter will explain that there has been a strong petition from a significant number of local residents that, with good reason, demonstrates that this is a matter of great public interest which is causing a great deal of local distress and which is undermining the public’s faith in both their District and County Councils in carrying out their duties. Furthermore, the state of the footway has given rise to genuine concerns about the safety of pedestrians and damage to residents’ vehicles – which could potentially give rise to claims against the Highway Authority as it falls within its duty to maintain the public highway.

 

With the full support and backing of the Members of this Planning Committee, the letter will demand that the completion of the footpath is given a higher priority and is resolved as a matter of urgency, utilising the available enforcement powers if necessary, and that this Council is provided with an explanation of the current position and a timetable for completing the works – which can be reported back to the Planning Committee and local residents.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Supporting documents: