After twenty years of wrangling, a case involving Mr Tony Rizza and hobby vehicles stored on his land continued on Tuesday (yesterday) at a meeting of Angus Council's development standards committee.

After a further 20 minutes of debate, it appeared time and patience was running out for Mr Rizza when councillors threw out his re-application to store 35 hobby vehicles on his land, which sits adjacent to the Forfar-Arbroath Road.

A similar application was turned down by the committee on February 17 this year.

An agent speaking on Mr Rizza's behalf told the meeting the case started in the 1980s when Mr Rizza lived in Letham.

Mr Rizza felt he had been misled by council officers at that time and more recently he had tried tirelessly to make his case to them, but to no effect.

In 1996 permission was granted for him to keep hobby vehicles on his ground, and what he was now asking for was "flexibility."

Over the last 18 months he had tidied up his site and had tried to comply with screening conditions fully.

He added: "He (Mr Rizza) assures me that he wishes this problem would go away.

"He is prepared to do whatever it takes to ensure that is the case."

However, councillors were of the opinion that it was Mr Rizza himself who had the means to make the problem go away.

Councillor John Rymer said: "There is no doubt he has breached conditions. He has taken no notice of legal issues."

Councillor Colin Brown added: "This problem would go away if he stuck to the conditions."

Arbroath councillor Bob Spink reminded the meeting Mr Rizza's case had been going on for 20 years.

He said: "The same application was refused in February, and now we are being asked to agree even more. I would suggest to Mr Rizza this problem would go away if he abides by the planning regulations.

"Ignoring them won't make them go away."

One lone voice in support of Mr Rizza came from Arbroath Councillor David Fairweather who put forward an amendment to allow Mr Rizza to keep 35 hobby vehicles on his land and to put in place suitable screening.

He said: "I am stunned that something has gone on for 20 years. I drove past this site again at the weekend and, to be perfectly honest, I didn't see anything untoward.

"This has been going on so long that I am worried that this has got a little bit personal."

Claiming the only people who would see 35 vehicles on the site would be those in an aeroplane he added: "We have a chance to resolve this.

"I don't know how much this has cost Mr Rizza, but I would love to know how much this has cost us in officers' time."

Whilst Councillor Rymer acknowledged the views of those who drove past Mr Rizza's site, he said those who lived next door had a different point of view.

"Mr Rizza is asking for flexibility. I think he has had that over the years but he has not complied to any enforcement. Until we see that he is prepared to obey the rules, and bearing in mind what his neighbours have had to put up with, then I move refusal."

In a report which went before yesterday' committee, Mr Eric Lowson, director of infrastructure services, stated a site inspection on May 14 this year found 28 vehicles at the site which had a generally unkempt appearance.

Full planning permission was granted on June 20, 1996 for the change of use for storage of family vehicles, subject to ten conditions.

The applicant appealed to the then Scottish Office against the planning conditions and the Reporter upheld the appeal, subject to conditions.

These conditions included a maximum number of vehicles which may be stored at the site, in connection with the applicant's hobby of vehicle restoration, being set at 14; all the above vehicles being stored in workshop buildings at the site or within a suitably located, screened and constructed compound; and no surplus vehicle parts or other scrap material derived from vehicles to be stored outwith the buildings on the site or any approved compound.

Following the above, there has been a complex planning history which has included a number of complaints from adjoining proprietors, the serving of enforcement and amenity notices on the applicant in an attempt to rectify the detriment on this site in the open countryside.

The last appeal by the applicant against the serving of enforcement and amenity notices was decided by the then Scottish Executive on October 23, 2006.

The Reporter dismissed these appeals, however, he did consider that the enforcement notice be upheld subject to variation of the terms of the notice.

In July, 2008 it came to the council's attention Mr Rizza was in breach of his planning consent by storing more than 14 hobby vehicles on site, not storing the 14 hobby vehicles (including a digger on the site) within a workshop, and parking more than six vehicles on site for private family use.

The council has been pursuing matters in order to achieve compliance with the terms of the original planning permission.

It was following this that the applicant submitted the previous application for Variation of Planning Condition, for further consideration. The description of this application was identical to the current application and this was refused by the development standards committee on February 17, 2009.

This was refused being contrary to Local Plan policy, as the development would have an adverse impact on the visual and residential amenity of the area.

The applicant has now appealed this decision to the Scottish Government. This appeal is at a very early stage.

After considering the report, and, with Mr Fairweather's amendment failing to secure a seconder, councillors refused the latest application before them.