|With regard agenda item 6 - 09/3015/LA Land at Tanners Bank/Poplar Road, Eaglescliffe, Stockton on Tees - Erection of 2 no. 15 metre high CCTV relay poles Councillor Mrs Rigg declared a Predisposition in favour of the application, having committed Community Participation budget funds to CCTV cameras/relay poles. Councillor Mrs Rigg had not pre-determined her position in regard to the siting and design of the relay poles which were the subject of this application.|
With regard agenda item 6 - 09/3015/LA Land at Tanners Bank/Poplar Road, Eaglescliffe, Stockton on Tees - Erection of 2 no. 15 metre high CCTV relay poles Councillor Mrs Beaumont declared a Predisposition in favour of the application, having committed Community Participation budget funds to CCTV cameras/relay poles. Councillor Mrs Beaumont had not pre-determined her position in regard to the siting and design of the relay poles which were the subject of this application.
Councillor Beall declared a personal non prejudicial in respect of agenda item 4 - 09/2964/LA Land at Corner of Talbot Street, Norton Road, Stockton on Tees - Erection of two storey Myplace youth facility with open space, multi-use games area, car park and new access from Talbot Street as he was the Chair of Eastern Ravens Trust who were involved discussions about using space in Myplace.
|Consideration was given to a report on an application that sought full planning permission for a two storey (including three storey staircase) detached Youth Centre (Myplace) with a Multi-Use Games Area, car park and new access from Talbot Street, on a corner site of approximately 0.5 hectares fronting Norton Road and Talbot Street.|
In March 2009 the Department of Children, Schools and Families (DCSF) announced that Stockton Borough Council had been awarded £4.9 million capital grant to create a new iconic youth facility in the Tilery area of Stockton on Tees.
Community consultation had been carried out in relation to the proposed redevelopment of the site and specifically with young people to ensure that the centre was being designed and constructed with the full involvement of young people and also residents surrounding the application site. The comments received helped shape the submission of the planning application for the Youth Centre layout and design.
The consultees that had been notified and the comments that had been received were detailed within the report.
It was noted that the applicant had undertaken consultation in accordance with the adopted Statement of Community Involvement. This included a wide range events with additional information provided through a range of ways, leaflets, media coverage, specialised website design and internet services.
Local residents had been individually notified of the application and it had also been advertised on site and in the local press. The comments that had been received were detailed within the report.
Where an adopted or approved development plan contained relevant policies, Section 38(6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 required that an application for planning permissions shall be determined in accordance with the Development Plan(s) for the area, unless material considerations indicate otherwise. In this case the relevant Development Plans was the saved policies of the Stockton on Tees Local Plan (STLP) and the Regional Spatial Strategy (RRS).
The planning policies that were considered to be relevant to the consideration of the application were detailed within the report.
The means of access, parking and traffic issues were detailed within the report.
Members agreed that if possible there should be more provision available for visitor cycle parking at the facility. The Acting Head of Technical Services outlined that he would look into the possibility of providing additional cycle parking at the facility for users/visitors.
Members felt that overall the nature and scale of the development was acceptable and parking provision and access was satisfactory. It was considered that the site could satisfactorily accommodate the proposal without any undue impact on the amenity of any adjacent neighbours and did not conflict with policies in the Development Plan.
|Consideration was given to a report on an application that sought planning permission for the erection of 1 CCTV camera attached to a 15m high pole to monitor the open space and play area within Blue Hall Recreation Ground. The proposal would be located within the centre of the Recreation Ground, adjacent to the footpath that ran through the centre of the site, and would be positioned adjacent to existing mature trees. |
The application site was Blue Hall Recreation Ground, located off Norton Avenue, Norton. The site consisted of a large playing field with a play area to the south east of the site. A footpath ran through the centre of the site from Leven Road (north) to Norton Avenue (south). Residential properties enclosed the site to the north, south, east and west.
The main planning considerations of the application were the impact on visual and residential amenity including the impact on privacy, and the impact on existing landscaping features within the site and any residual matters.
No objections had been received from The Acting Head of Technical Services, the Council's Landscape Architect or the Environmental Health Unit.
A letter of representation had been received from the neighbouring property of No 51 Eamont Road, who had raised concerns with regard to the proposed CCTV camera monitoring his garden and bedroom and therefore leading to a loss of privacy.
The application was being reported to the Planning Committee for determination as the proposal did not fall within the scheme of delegation.
Members felt that the location of the proposed CCTV camera within the park was acceptable. The development was considered to be an important resource in providing a safe and secure environment for local residents and their families. The proposal was therefore judged to accord with saved policy GP1 and with the aims of PPG17.
|Consideration was given to a report that sought planning permission for the erection of 2 CCTV relay poles; one pole would be located at Tanners Bank, Aislaby Road, Eaglescliffe and the second relay pole would be located at Poplar Road, Eaglescliffe. The poles would measure a maximum of 15m in height x 0.35m in width x 0.4m and did not contain any camera equipment.|
The proposed 15m high CCTV relay pole at Tanners Bank would be located on the south side of the highway (Aislaby Road) and would be adjacent to the railway bridge. The proposal would be erected against a backdrop of mature trees and planting and would be located next an existing street lighting column. The proposed pole at Poplar Road would be located on a small strip of grassed area, which lay adjacent to the highways of Urlay Nook Road (west) and Poplar Road (east).
The main planning considerations of the application were the impact on visual and residential amenity, and the impact on existing landscaping features within the site and any residual matters.
No objections had been received from The Acting Head of Technical Services, the Council's Landscape Architect or the Environmental Health Unit.
5 letters of representation had been received from neighbouring properties; 4 letters had been received from residents within vicinity of the site at Poplar Road, who had raised concerns with regard to the impact of the poles on the signals of domestic appliances, and the impact on health and safety. 1 letter of objection had been received from Prospect House, which was located within vicinity of the proposed site at Tanners Bank. The objection related to the impact on the surrounding area, the impact on health and safety and several other matters related to the application being invalid.
The application was being reported to the Planning Committee for determination as it was a development by Stockton on Tees Borough Council and the proposal was not within the scheme of delegation.
Members received an update report which outlined that since the publication of the original report, one additional letter of representation had been received from the residential property of Kirngarth, Aislaby Road. The representation supported the principle of the application but had raised concerns with regard to the potential for the future use of the 2 CCTV relay poles for CCTV cameras, which could lead to an adverse loss of privacy. The submitted representation also stated that the proposal would lead to a loss of visual amenity and would result in a loss of property value.
With regard to the future use of the proposed CCTV relay poles for CCTV camera use and the associated potential loss of privacy, the applicant had confirmed that the proposed CCTV relay poles did not include any camera equipment. Any additional equipment would not be in accordance with the agreed details and would require planning permission. The impact of the proposed CCTV relay poles on the privacy of adjacent neighbouring land users had been addressed within the main Report. As the poles did not contain any cameras, it was considered that the proposal would not lead to an adverse loss of amenity in terms of loss of outlook, overlooking, and overbearing for adjacent residential properties.
The impact of the proposed CCTV relay poles on the visual amenity of the surrounding areas at the respective sites of Tanners Bank and Poplar Road had been addressed in the main report.
The matter of the CCTV relay poles leading to a reduction in property value was not a material planning consideration.
It was considered that the additional comments raised did not alter the conclusions or recommendation within the main report.
Members felt that the locations of the proposed CCTV relay poles at both locations were acceptable and that the proposals would not have a significant adverse impact on the visual amenity of the respective surrounding areas or lead to a loss of amenity for respective neighbouring properties. Members considered that the proposals would not adversely affect existing landscape features or lead to an adverse loss of highway or public safety. Members further considered that the proposed scheme would not give rise to any adverse health and safety implications or adversely affect the frequency of the signal to domestic appliances. Members felt that the proposed scheme accorded with saved policy GP1.
|Consideration was given to a report that updated Members on the performance of the planning department for the third quarter of 2009/2010. |
There were a range of National Indicators (NI) against which the performance of the Council was assessed, Planning being directly responsible for 3, (NI 157, 159 and 170) and having an impact on another 7 (NI 154, 155, 185, 186, 187, 188 and 198). Of these, 2 planning indicators had been included in the Local Area Agreement (LAA), in consultation with GONE and the Local Strategic Partnership (LSP) i.e. Renaissance Board. NI157 related to the processing of planning applications against targets which the local authority sets itself for major, minor and other applications and NI 159 related to the supply of ready to develop housing sites, which was determined through the RSS housing numbers and the SHLAA.
With regards to performance, it had been the responsibility of each local authority to set their own targets. For LAA purposes it was necessary to set annual targets (for a three year period) to show the ambition to have the service improving year-on-year from a baseline position. The expectation of GONE was for ambitious and stretching targets since Stockton on Tees Borough Council was an "excellent" Council
The targets that had been set for the 3 year period were detailed within the report.
The reporting timeframe for the NI targets remained and ran from 1st April-31st March. The report presented the performance of the third quarter in that period, 1st October -31st December 2009.
The NI indicator was reported on the annual year-end results, and the third quarter's results were available. Performance results achieved for that period were 90.00% for major applications, 87.50% for minor and 94.92% for others, achieving above performance in all 3 categories. A Table and a chart in the report highlighted performance over the third quarter/year to date.
Performance in all categories had exceeded NI standards in the second quarter of the year, and also the cumulative figures for the year to date. The 2 majors which missed the target date for determination were the residential development at Allens West where the section 106 agreement was only signed before Christmas due to the company going into receivership as a result of the economic climate, and a variation of an existing approval for a residential development off Millbank Lane in Thornaby.
With regards to staffing, Simon Grundy had been appointed Area Team Leader to replace Peter Whaley who had retired in September 2009, and Ann Austin retired from her post as Enforcement Officer. It was not the intention to fill these 2 vacant posts at the time of this meeting. In addition, Fiona Bage, the Historic Buildings Officer, started her maternity leave and would be off for a year, with the job role being shared amongst existing staff on a temporary basis.
The Housing and Planning Delivery Grant (HPDG) allocation for 2009/2010 was received prior to Christmas 2009, with just over £296,000 being awarded to Stockton for its housing delivery, and for progress with the LDF and associated documents, including the SHLAA. This was in excess of what had been anticipated, and it was rewarding to see the hard work of all the staff reflected in the size of the grant allocation. It was not known if HPDG would continue in the next financial year, which could potentially place a budgetary pressure on the service and its delivery.
The Chairman thanked the Head of Planning for all of the hard work and dedication that she and her staff had put into continuously improving performance of the Planning Department. The Chairman particularly drew Members attention to the smooth transition that the Head of Planning had achieved during a time of great change to the work of the Department. The Chairman outlined that he would be writing to all of the Officers in the Planning Department thanking them for their hard work and dedication.