Agenda item

E/12/0190/B - Unauthorised erection of an entrance gate to development at Crosier Place, St John Street, Hertford, SG14 1RX

Enforcement.

Minutes:

The Director of Neighbourhood Services recommended that, in respect of the sites relating to E/12/0190/B, enforcement action be authorised on the basis now detailed.

 

Councillor S Rutland-Barsby, as the local ward Member, commented that she had received e-mails from residents of Crosier Place, expressing concerns regarding the 30 or so vehicles, not belonging to residents, that often turned into and out of this site in an inappropriate manner. 

 

Councillor S Rutland-Barsby commented that she would support enforcement action but with a delay of 3 months before any enforcement notice was served to allow the developer the opportunity to consider the installation of a less obtrusive barrier.

 

Councillor D Andrews stated that, whilst he had some sympathy with the residents of Crosier Place, East Herts was an inclusive District where crime was low and detection rates were on the increase.  He expressed concern that a gated development had been created on this site.  He commented on whether rising bollards could be installed to avoid the current fortress-like appearance of the site.

 

Councillor Mrs R Cheswright sought advice on what type of gate/barrier would be acceptable once the current unauthorised gate was removed.  The Director stated that the shared nature of the space between the properties meant that any resolution to conflict between cars and pedestrians would have to be a design solution for the developer.

 

The Director commented that Crosier Place was located at the end of a cul-de-sac so preventing cars from turning around at the end of the street was always going to be a difficult issue.  Members were advised that any solution would be based around the design and management of the space.

 

Councillor S Rutland-Barsby proposed and Councillor M Alexander seconded, a motion that enforcement action be authorised so long as the service of the enforcement notice would not take place before the expiry of a period of 3 months from the date of this meeting.

 

After being put to the meeting and a vote taken, this motion was declared CARRIED.  The Committee accepted the Director’s recommendation for enforcement action to be authorised in respect of the site relating to E/12/0190/B and the service of any notice shall not take place before the expiry of a period of 3 months from the date of this meeting.

 

RESOLVED – that in respect of E/12/0190/B, the Director of Neighbourhood Services, in consultation with the Director of Internal Services, be authorised to take enforcement action under Section 172 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 and any such further steps as may be required to secure the cessation of the unauthorised use and the service of any notice shall not take place before the expiry of a period of 3 months from the date of this meeting.

 

Period for compliance: 1 month.

 

Reasons why it is expedient to issue an enforcement notice:

 

1.           The gates introduce an unattractive and fortified appearance detrimental to the overall design of the site, disconnecting it from the approach via St Johns Street. The development is thereby harmful to the appearance and character of the Conservation Area and contrary to local plan policies ENV1, ENV3 and BH6 of the adopted East Herts Local Plan April 2007.         

 

2.           When closed, the gates would create an unwarranted barrier to movement that would be detrimental to the use of site by pedestrians, cyclists and the disabled. It would thereby be contrary to Policies TR1 and TR4 of the East Herts Local Plan Second Review April 2007, the objectives of the local transport plan to encourage the  use of sustainable transport modes as well as the provisions of the National Planning Policy Framework (para 35 and 69 ).       

3.           The gates have not been justified on security grounds and would be more likely to create social division and add to the perceived fear of crime contrary to the provisions of the National Planning Policy Framework (para 58 and 69).

Supporting documents: