Update: Tories proposed an amendment, which made the motion read like this:
During the process of approval of planning applications, the public sometimes has a mistaken concept of the protection afforded by the conditions attached to the planning permission. Officers and members already make great efforts to ensure that conditions are only imposed where they are deemed to be enforceable. This Council will continue to impose such conditions only when enforceable in accordance with national guidelines and our own enforcement policy.
I said, “Conditions are applied to permission for applications that would be unacceptable without the conditions. The conditions are explicitly attached to make an otherwise unacceptable development acceptable. (Then list of examples.) We need better governance over our planning conditions. If the condition is necessary to make a development acceptable, then they need to be enforceable and enforced. We shouldn’t see any applications be approved to remove conditions. That would be a useful metric to track.” Debate continued with many examples of recent conditions deemed (after the fact) to be unenforceable.
I also pointed out that the ruling group was becoming predictable: any motion we table with any element of criticism, is amended to read, ‘We already do this really well and will continue to do it really well.’ That’s pretty immature.
The amended motion was passed. Cllr Roger Cox is responsible for the quality of planning conditions.
—- Original post follows…..
Vale Lib Dems have proposed a motion to allow only enforceable conditions to be attached to planning permissions. Full council meeting 20 July is open to the public.
“During the process of the approval of planning applications, the public sometimes has a mistaken concept of the protection afforded by the conditions attached to planning permission. This council will only attach such conditions as are deemed enforceable.”