Steve Webb MP (our local MP) has recently asked the South Gloucestershire Council to clarify its enforcement policy.

Read on to see the questions he asked and the response that he received...

Dear Mr Ford,

I write with reference to your letter of 16 May (SF/MC/DIR71591), for which many thanks.

After further correspondence and a meeting with local residents, I have undertaken on their behalf to find out more about enforcement policy. I have written to the DCLG about what national guidelines, if any, apply to such matters, but the decision of the Council is clearly central to this case. I have a particular and urgent interest in this issue because I have a debate at Westminster on Tuesday where I will be probing Government ministers over the guidelines they give to councils about enforcing planning conditions when there is a further 'live' planning application under consideration.

You have said that it would not be expedient to take enforcement action while Cemex's application is pending. I should be grateful for more information about the reasons for this judgment. For example, if it is about the use of the department's limited budget, has an assessment of the likely cost of such action been made? Furthermore, is there a procedure by which this can be weighed against the impact of the quarry's unauthorised activities on people living nearby (itself unquantifiable, as far as I am aware)?

Finally, has an assessment been made as to the implications of its being widely known that the Council will not take action in these circumstances? Is it not probable that it will lead to more breaches because applicants will conclude that it is worth the minimal risk?

Thank you for your further help.

With kind regards.

Steve Webb MP

And here's the reply from Mr Ford:

Dear Mr Webb,

Thank you for your e-mail.

Since the three separate applications have been submitted the Council has received numerous letters raising concern about operations at the quarry taking place outside permitted hours and extraction rates exceeding those previously permitted and seeking immediate enforcement action to remedy the breaches before the current application proposing the expansion of the quarry is considered.

Government guidance in PPG18 advises that where it is possible that planning permission (subject to conditions) may be granted to regularise the situation, that Local Planning Authorities should request the submission of retrospective planning applications. This approach is reflected in the Council's own Planning Enforcement Concordat.

In this instance the Council has pursued this approach and is currently dealing with three planning applications which cover all of the operations and impacts referred to within the recent objections. All comments received are passed to the case officer as consultation responses and considered as part of the application process. These issues will in due course be addressed in the full report to the Development Control (West) Committee in consideration of these applications.

Whilst these applications are under consideration, it is not considered expedient for the Council to take formal enforcement action against the matters that are the subject of these submissions. This is because the breaches that have been identified are accepted by Cemex, and subsequent applications have without prejudice been invited whereby they may, subject to detailed consideration against the policies of the Development Plan, be approved. It would not therefore be prudent to enforce in relation to breaches of planning control which are capable of being resolved through the granting of a conditional planning consent.

Furthermore in the event that an Enforcement Notice is served the appellants would have up to 6 months to appeal, so in terms of practical impact, this would not have the immediate effect of remedying the breach. Similarly if formal enforcement action is pursued and subsequently appealed and meanwhile the applications are permitted then the Council would not be in a position to defend its approach or position.

Notwithstanding this, Environmental Health legislation is also available to the Council, particularly if Statutory Nuisance levels are being breached particularly in terms of noise or dust arisings. The Council's Environmental Health Officer is currently carrying out up to date noise monitoring distinct from the methodology in the submitted application at the nearest sensitive residential properties to establish whether noise attributable to the quarry operations is a justifiable cause for complaint. This evidence will inform the Council's assessment of background noise levels from existing operations as well as the environmental impact which is resulting from the activities associated with the current planning applications.

In the event that the current applications to regularise the breach of conditions are refused in due course by the Council, then the Council's Enforcement Team will be in a position to take formal enforcement against Cemex should the breach of conditions persist.

I hope this information clarifies the Council's position.

Yours sincerely

Simon Ford

Senior Planning Officer

Minerals and Waste

Be first to comment this article

Only registered users can write comments.
Please login or register.

Powered by AkoComment Tweaked Special Edition v.1.4.6
AkoComment © Copyright 2004 by Arthur Konze - www.mamboportal.com
All right reserved