Councillors were warned today the authority would lose a costly planning appeal if they pushed for stringent conditions on plans for £1 million pub in Shrewsbury.
Earlier this month JD Wetherspoon revealed it was considering appealing after its plans for a pub in the Pride Hill Shopping Centre were thrown into doubt.
The plans have been approved subject to the signing of a Section 106 legal agreement requiring staff to clean the streets up to 50 metres from the entrance and for Wetherspoons to link its proposed private CCTV system to Shrewsbury and Atcham Borough Council’s town centre system.
But the council’s senior solicitor Christopher Gordon is warning the development control committee the conditions are “unreasonable” and should be considered as part of a premises licence application.
In a report to the committee which meets on Tuesday, he says: “In a Section 106 agreement, obligations to be fulfilled by an applicant cannot be forced upon an applicant by a planning authority.
“These obligations can be present only if agreed by the applicant. If a planning authority still seeks to impose obligations on a S106 agreement then this imposition will be ‘ultra vires’, or in other words beyond the power of the authority.
“Thus the applicants would certainly make a successful appeal against the imposition and would be awarded the costs of the appeal. These costs would have to be paid by the planning authority.”
He is recommending approval with the conditions previously approved but without a Section 106 agreement or refusal giving “sustainable reasons”.
Loading ...
5 Comments
Well well. A story declaring the ratepayers of Shropshire will have to pay for a “costly” planning enquiry regarding a town centre pub, and one which follows hot on the heels of dire warnings about the pub industry in the county.
If I wasn’t so convinced of the fairness of the British media I’d start to think there was an ulterior motive to the timing of these stories.
Hmmn.
50 metres from the proposed location of Wetherspoons would have its staff cleaning Pride Hill for the council, wouldn’t it? Blindingly obvious how wrong that is.
The planners always think they are more important than they actually are.
They try to force people in a 106, but what they have asked for is not enforceable in law as it is outside their own duristiction.
What the councillors want is the moon on a stick.
Greedy and stupid.
Perhaps you should all take a look at the wetherspoons website, where they swear undying committment to the the community, the environment, and working with neighbours to keep the areas used clean and safe. When you have read it, you will see just why councillors feel as they do.The council clean up everyones mess - they dont make the mess, and if everyone took pride in their town and the environment no one would need to be forced into cleaning up. Look at the wetherspoons profits for last year alone, and se if you agree ? they can afford to clean up the customers mess who have just filled their tills. To those who feel worthy of commenting on this website, go to the coucil meeting next tuesday, and find out the facts, as often too much truth in a story can spoil it!