Agenda item

The Committee considered a report of the Head of Spatial Policy, Planning, Assets and the Environment regarding the potential disposal of open space land for private garden use adjacent to The Todner, Front Street, Dipton (for copy see file of Minutes).

The Committee were informed that objections had been received to the proposed disposal following an encroachment on Council land.  The loss of open space was acceptable under planning policy and was approved on 10 October 2012.  Following this approval, in accordance with relevant legislation the loss of open space was advertised within the local media which had resulted in a number of objections.

The objections raised centred around the loss of an area for amenity use and cited that the outlook for residents nearby would be affected.  There was also an objection that the land had been fenced off without the Council’s permission and concerns had been expressed about the process that had been followed.

The Committee listened to representations from one of the local members, Councillor Alderson.  A number of residents in Dipton had contacted him about the erection of the fence.  At the time of querying the erection of the fence there had been an enquiry regarding the possible purchase of the land but at that time, nothing had been processed.  The nearby, ‘Delight Court’, some sheltered accommodation, previously looked out onto the open land, however this had now been obstructed because of the fencing off of the area.

The applicant informed the Committee that the request to purchase the land had been made in January 2011.  The land had become overgrown with bushes.  In addition to this it was a common occurrence for rubble to be dumped on the land and it also attracted fly-tipping.  The fire brigade had been called to extinguish fires on more than one occasion to the area of land in question.  Two neighbours had also purchased adjoining land to their properties. 

The applicant accepted that he had fenced off the area without permission. The Council had indicated long before the erection of the fence that they would be inclined to sell the land to him and at no point had the applicant been asked to dismantle the fence.

In relation to the objections that had been received applicant commented that the garden would enhance the area and would be in-keeping with other houses in the area. The applicant commented that accusations had been made about him in relation to other parcels of land and stated that these were categorically untrue.

Councillor Kay assured the applicant that the Committee would only deal with the facts of the matter and the application before them.  Any comments about former Councillors or the process would not be part of the decision making process.

The Planning and Development Solicitor advised the Committee that discussion about the possible returns to the County Council, by way of a covenant were not relevant to the application, nor were any accusations. The key deciding factor for the Committee related to whether they felt it acceptable for the land to be designated as open space.

Councillor R Ormerod commented that generally, it was not in favour of the Council keeping pockets of land outlined in the application in such austere times, particularly when there were more suitable areas of open space within the area.

Councillor Stradling commented that having considered all the information provided and listening to the representations made, that the land should cease to be classified as open space.

Resolved

That the recommendation in the report be agreed.