A Labour councillor has been refused permission to install a dropped kerb at his home due to road safety concerns – overturning a previous decision that sparked controversy last year.
Mustafa Cetinkaya, who represents Haselbury ward in Edmonton, was initially granted approval for the dropped kerb in September.
However, the decision was later reviewed by Enfield Council’s legal team after Conservative councillors raised concerns about the “integrity” of the Labour-majority committee, which approved the councillor’s personal application despite planning officers advising against it on safety grounds.
Following a review by the council’s monitoring officer – who found the original decision had “not given sufficient regard to all the technical advice” – the application returned to the planning committee for a second debate on Tuesday night (3rd).
This time, members took just over ten minutes to unanimously reject Cllr Cetinkaya’s proposal.
Cllr Cetinkaya was in attendance at the meeting and at one point attempted to interject and speak out as a planning officer was giving their reasons for recommending his dropped kerb be rejected.
But committee chair Mahym Bedekova told the Labour councillor he had not registered to speak ahead of the meeting so could not voice his objection.
A council planning officer explained that the application site in Bury Street was “constrained” and that any vehicle using the area in front of the house would “not practically be able to manoeuvre to enter or exit the site in forward gear”.
The council classed Bury Street as a “busy carriageway” and determined that manoeuvring a vehicle in these conditions was “hazardous” to other vehicles and users of the road.
The site also fell below the 4.8-metre depth recommended to accommodate most vehicles and prevent overhanging on the pavement. As such, the site didn’t meet the policy requirements for a drive, councillors were told.
Conservative committee member Michael Rye said: “I can understand from the point of view of the resident [Cllr Cetinkaya] it’s frustrating that neighbours apparently have access to crossovers [dropped kerbs]. The problem we have is our policy is extremely clear.
“It is non-compliant in terms of the 4.8m depth recommended. We have an inspector’s decision that makes it very clear that this is a matter of road and traffic safety and is potentially a hazard.
“There’s very few planning applications we have before us that actually involve us having to consider life and limb and that’s what we’re being asked to do, therefore I would support the officer’s recommendation [to refuse permission].”
Labour committee member George Savva said he didn’t often agree with Cllr Rye but, on this occasion, he agreed “wholeheartedly”.
Cllr Savva said the officer’s recommendation to refuse permission for the dropped kerb was “absolutely right” and added: “We don’t go against council policy. It’s clear there’s nothing much more to say. The plan has been here before [planning committee] when I was not a member and the policy hasn’t changed since then, so therefore it’s not appropriate.”
Following the debate, the application was unanimously rejected.
