Agenda item

Certificate of existing lawful development for sections of new/replacement 1.8 m perimeter fencing.

Cramlington Learning Village, Cramlington, NE23 6BN.

Certificate of existing lawful development for sections of new/replacement 1.8m perimeter fencing.

Cramlington Learning Village, Cramlington, NE23 6BN

A Ali, Planning Officer introduced the report to the Committee with the aid of a power point presentation.  He advised that there was a change to the recommendation outlined in the report and this should now read:

It is Recommended that Members grant a Certificate of Lawfulness.

In response to questions from Members of the Committee the following information was provided:-

·       The application for a Certificate of Lawfulness for the permitted development had been brought to Committee in order to allow an open discussion to take place in view of the history surrounding the Cramlington Learning Village (CLV) and high level of objections received.  Objections were largely based on the perception that the gate in the fence would block the Public Right of Way (PRoW).   Members would be able to refuse the application, however this would not prevent the fence being there as it was permitted development.

·       A great deal of dialogue had been undertaken with the Public Rights of Way Officer and it had been made clear to CLV that the gate must remain open and whilst the gate had been seen to have been closed, CLV had advised that they did not know who had done this as they were fully aware that it could not be closed.

·       Members could only decide if they wished to issue a Certificate of Lawfulness in connection with the permitted development which did not require any planning permission.  Any blocking of the PRoW would need to be dealt with under different legislation.

·       The gate was part of the fence which was allowed under permitted development.

·       There had been an application to extinguish the PRoW, however until such time as that had been decided the gate must remain open.  Any decision to extinguish a PRoW would need to be made by the Secretary of State. 

·       The DEFRA Regs as highlighted by Councillor Swinburn would need to be referred to the PRoW Officer for his comments.  As this was permitted development as allowed under planning legislation there was very little which could be done.

·       If the issue regarding gated vehicular access and the possible moving of these gates was not caused by this application then this would need to be discussed with the Highways Team outside of this application.  If the issue was being caused as part of this application by the gates being closed when they should not be then the PRoW Officer would need to take this up with CLV.

·       Residents being unable to access the outside of their fences would need to be taken up with CLV or dealt with as a civil matter between CLV and neighbours if agreement could not be reached.

·       Whilst CLV did not require a Certificate of Lawfulness it had been suggested as part of pre-application discussions when they had enquired if the fence would need planning permission that they could apply for a one. 

Councillor Flux proposed acceptance of the revised recommendation that Members Grant a Certificate of Lawfulness, which was seconded by Councillor Ferguson.

Members in the most whilst debating the issue acknowledged that the fence had been erected in response to safeguarding issues within the CLV site, the closing of gates over the PRoW would be a matter to be taken forward with the PRoW officer and there was no reason to refuse to grant a Certificate of Lawfulness. 

A vote was taken on the proposal to GRANT a Certificate of Lawfulness as follows: FOR 9; AGAINST 2; ABSTENSIONS 0.

RESOLVED that a Certificate of Lawfulness be GRANTED.

A short break was held at this point and the meeting recommenced at 5.14 pm