Agenda item

To consider recommendations that it is not expedient to take enforcement action relating to (i) hard standings and remaining boundary fencing; (ii) any hard standings covered by the 2^nd Bite Enforcement Notice; (iii) the skip hire business; and (iv) the existing concrete batching plant operation

The Committee considered a report by the Group Manager – Development Management (1) updating Members on enforcement matters relating to land at the former Fullers Earthworks, Combe Hay, and delivery of a Residual Waste Facility (RWF); and (2) written representation from a local resident and oral statements by a representative of the Bath Preservation Trust and the landowner’s agent.

The Chair reported the view of Combe Hay Parish Council on the matter.

The Principal Planning/Enforcement Officer provided a power point presentation and answered Members’ questions.

The Committee discussed the matter. Some concern was expressed regarding the previous planning history of the site and reassurance was sought that the landowner would fulfil his obligations. Some Members also felt that 18 months was too long to wait before the RWF would be delivered and outstanding enforcement issues resolved. The Group Manager stated that the application for an RWF had been in 2 parts with the outline permission having been granted and the reserved matters soon to be determined by the Committee. It was expected that it would probably take 18 months for reserved matters conditions to be discharged and the development delivered. The report set out the matters that it was considered in-expedient for the Council to enforce against at this time subject to the delivery of the RWF. Members sought clarification on the timing of the RWF delivery and current unauthorised uses at the site. The Group Manager stated a 6 monthly report could be brought to the Committee so that Members could be kept updated. . He further advised that, if the appeal against the Second Bite Enforcement Notice was not withdrawn within a month, the matter should be submitted to the Committee for reconsideration. Members supported this as a way forward.

The Committee therefore approved the report and accordingly:

RESOLVED that it is not expedient to:

(1)  require the removal of the hard standings and remaining boundary fencing from the areas covered by Enforcement Notices 2 and 3 where they coincide with areas to be developed as part of the RWF and landscaping permission provided the RWF is implemented within 18 months of this report;

(2)  require the removal of any hard standings covered by the Second Bite Enforcement Notice where they coincide with areas to be developed as part of the RWF permission provided that the RWF is implemented within 18 months from the date of this report;

(3)  enforce against the skip hire business as it currently operates within Area A and is ancillary to the B2 waste processing activities taking place within that Area; and

(4)  enforce against the existing concrete batching plant operation provided it operates within Area A and the material storage bays are removed from Area E.

In addition, Members agreed that (i) a report be submitted to the Committee in June if the appeal against the Second Bite Enforcement Notice had not been withdrawn within 1 month; and (ii) an update report be submitted to Committee on a 6 monthly basis.

(Note: The following day, the landowner’s agent confirmed that the Enforcement Notice appeal had now been withdrawn.)