Agenda and minutes

Estate Management Appeals Panel
Wednesday 14th August 2019 7.30 pm

Venue: Council Chamber, Council Offices, The Campus, Welwyn Garden City, Herts, AL8 6AE

Contact: Helen Johnson 

Items
No. Item

10.

MINUTES

To confirm as a correct record the Minutes of the meeting held on 13 June 2019 (previously circulated).

Minutes:

The minutes of the meeting on 13 June 2019 were approved as a correct record and signed by the Chairman.

11.

APOLOGIES

To note any apologies.

Minutes:

Apologies for absence were received from Councillor M.Cowan and Councillor F.Marsh.

12.

SUBSTITUTION OF MEMBERS

To note any substitution of Panel Members made in accordance with Council Procedure Rules.

Minutes:

The following substitution of Panels Members were made in accordance with Council Procedure Rules:

 

Councillor A.Dennis for Councillor M.Cowan and Councillor S.Elam for Councillor F.Marsh.

13.

13 THE CROFT, WELWYN GARDEN CITY - 6/2018/3109/EM - REPLACEMENT OF FRONT DOOR (RETROSPECTIVE) pdf icon PDF 332 KB

The report of the Corporate Director (Public Protection, Planning and Governance) sets out an appeal against the refusal of Estate Management consent for the replacement of a front door (retrospective).

Additional documents:

Minutes:

The report of the Corporate Director (Public Protection, Planning and Governance) set out the appeal against the refusal of Estate Management (EM) Consent for the retention of a replacement front door.

 

The application was refused in February 2019 “by virtue of its uncharacteristic colour, and modern design would constitute a change that would be significantly out of character with the area to the detriment of the character and appearance of the property and the immediate street scene. Accordingly the proposal would fail to maintain the values and amenities of the EM scheme and is contrary to Policy EM1 of the EMS”.

 

The site contained a two storey, mid-terraced dwelling with a pitched roof and formed part of a row of three terrace properties. The dwelling was located on the south side of The Croft. The dwellings along The Croft were generally consistent in character, appearance and design. The property featured a flat roof front canopy with white narrow pillars.

 

The previous front door was white and was designed with a rectangular glazed top panel and solid rectangular lower panel. Either side of the front door were two glazed panels which replicated the design of the front door.

 

The proposal sought the retention of the existing front door with a modern style door. The proposed door was a composite, timber effect door with a narrow glazed panel positioned in the middle. The front door was set within two glazed panels either side of the front door which replicated the design of the front door. Additionally, the proposed door would be finished in brown which was a departure from the predominant white door colour within The Croft and wider Garden City.

 

The report noted that a case had been advanced by the appellant in support of the appeal but that no additional evidence or information has been put forward by the appellant which added to or would alter Officers recommendation

 

The appellant spoke in support of her appeal and raised the following points:

 

·         She thought consent was not required as there was “no mention of colour”, however Officers confirmed that it was only specified as to what did not require consent, and colour was not listed and accordingly this meant that a change in colour would require consent.

 

·         That many properties in the areas had different doors that departed from the EMS, however the assessment of the application had been based on the immediate area where every application is considered on its own merits. In this instance, The Croft consisted of traditional, white doors, which the proposed scheme did not reflect.

 

·         The appellant thought that Officers had suggested a brown door, but the Officer clarified that the colour of the door had been mistaken as brown, and they understood that it was a black door.

 

 

 

 

·         She felt that the Council website was not prescriptive enough however the Officer considered it the responsibility of the appellant to contract the Local Planning Authority or obtain the services of a Planning Agent.

 

·         The appellant felt  ...  view the full minutes text for item 13.

14.

UPDATE ON OUTSTANDING ENFORCEMENT CASES AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR ENFORCEMENT ACTION UNDER THE TERMS OF THE MANAGEMENT SCHEME FOR WELWYN GARDEN CITY FOR BREACHES OF THAT SCHEME

Minutes:

The report of the Corporate Director (Public Protection, Planning and Governance) updated Panel Members with regard to outstanding arbitration cases that had been put before the Panel as well as additional cases for consideration.

 

            RESOLVED:

 

(1)  That the Panel note the contents of the report and the action taken for each case.

 

(Note:A more detailed record of the Panel’s decision is contained in exempt Minute 18)