Agenda and minutes

            The Committee was reminded that, at its meeting on 24th June, it had considered a response, which had been received from the Department of the Environment’s Strategic Planning Division, in relation to concerns which had been raised by the Committee previously in connection with the proliferation of ‘To Let’ and ‘For Sale’ signs which were displayed at properties, especially in the south of the City.  Information had also been requested on the legislative powers which existed to control the display of such signs and the steps which could be taken to enforce the legislation.  The Committee had noted that response and had agreed that a further letter be issued to the Acting Chief Planner suggesting that a restriction be placed upon agents to display one sign only at each property, located on the inside of  a window as opposed to being placed on the outside.  

            The Committee was advised that a further response had been received from the Strategic Planning Division which had stated that the Advertisement Regulations allowed for signs relating to the sale or letting of a property to be displayed, with deemed consent, on the condition that the sign was removed within 14 days after the sale was completed or the tenancy was granted.  The Strategic Planning Division had provided information on the dimensions and locations of acceptable signs and had stated that the majority of Estate Agents displayed boards within the parameters set out in the Regulations.  It was accepted that there was a proliferation of signage in the vicinity of the Queens’ University and it was acknowledged that it could have a detrimental impact on the amenity of the area.  Arising from the actions which had been taken by the Planning Service thus far, in terms of corresponding with Estate Agents and reminding them of the Regulations and of their responsibilities in that regard, there had been a reduction of 25 signs displayed in the area.  A fourth survey was currently underway, the results of which would be notified to the Committee in due course.

            After discussion, the Committee noted the information which had been provided and noted also that the Area Planning Manager would provide a further update to a future meeting.

            The Committee was reminded that, at its meeting on 17th October, it had agreed to defer consideration of a report on the deferrals process to enable further information to be obtained on:     

·         the authority permitting individual Members and the Committee as a whole to seek to defer applications for office meetings;

·         the level of support by the Council which may be available to Members in the event of any subsequent challenge; and

·         clarification on the use of the Committee’s delegated powers in relation to the deferrals process.

            The Committee was advised that discussions had taken place with the Planning Service, the Urban Development Manager and the Town Solicitor in that regard and that the following clarification had been obtained:

·      the authority permitting individual Members and the Committee as a whole to seek to defer applications for office meetings:

            The authority is contained in the Standing Order 46(f), viz.,

            The Town Planning Committee shall be responsible for:-

            Considering applications for permission to carry out development within the area of the Council and formulating views thereon for submission to the Department of the Environment for Northern Ireland, the Committee having delegated authority from the Council in this regard where its decisions are unanimous. Considering and commenting on housing development programmes and proposals submitted by the Government and the Northern Ireland Housing Executive.

·      The level of support by the Council which may be available to Members in the event of any subsequent challenge:

In the event of a planning application being deferred for an office meeting by an individual Member and that request was not challenged by any other Member of the Committee, then it would be the Committee as a whole which had agreed to defer the application.

In the event that the Committee did not accept a proposal that a particular application be deferred, the decision, as it was not unanimous, falls to be determined by the full Council.

In the event of a challenge being made to a decision to defer a particular application that challenge would, therefore, be against a Committee decision.  Any such challenge would be referred to the Legal Services Department for attention as would any other challenge against any Committee decision.

·      Use of the Committee’s delegated powers in relation to the deferrals process:

The use of the Committee’s delegated powers in relation to this issue is contained in the Standing Order 46(f) above.  The Guidance Notes, which had been issued by the Planning Service in 2005, had stated that a long and established element in the consultation process had allowed for district councils to request the Planning Service to defer consideration of individual applications if they disagreed with the preliminary opinion.  As the powers to consider applications for permission to carry out development within the area of the Council have been delegated to the Town Planning Committee, then any decision taken by that Committee is under the authority of the Council.  It is however important that decisions represent the corporate view of the Council and are  ...  view the full minutes text for item 51.