Stockton-on-Tees Borough Council

Big plans, bright future

Planning Committee Minutes

Date:
Wednesday, 12th April, 2017
Time:
1.30pm
Place:
Jim Cooke Conference Suite, Stockton Central Library, Stockton on Tees, TS18 1TU
 
Please note: all Minutes are subject to approval at the next Meeting

Attendance Details

Present:
Cllr Norma Stephenson O.B.E(Chairman), Cllr Stephen Parry(Vice-Chairman), Cllr Helen Atkinson, Cllr Carol Clark,Cllr Eileen Johnson(Sub Cllr Nigel Cooke), Cllr David Harrington(Sub Cllr Gillian Corr), Cllr Philip Dennis, Cllr Lynn Hall, Cllr Paul Kirton, Cllr Mick Stoker, Cllr Tracey Stott, Cllr Ian Dalgarno(Sub Cllr Mrs Sylvia Walmsley), Cllr David Wilburn
Officers:
Greg Archer, Simon Grundy, Barry Jackson, Emma Leonard, Chris Renahan, Peter Shovlin(DEGDS) Julie Butcher(DHR,L&C), Sarah Whaley(DCE)
In Attendance:
Applicants Agents and Members of the Public.
Apologies for absence:
Cllr Nigel Cooke, Cllr Gillian Corr, Cllr Elsi Hampton, Cllr Mrs Sylvia Walmsley,
Item Description Decision
Public
P
1/17
EVACUATION PROCEDURE
 
P
2/17
DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST
 
P
3/17
MINUTES OF THE MEETING WHICH WAS HELD ON THE 15TH MARCH 2017
RESOLVED that the minutes be approved and signed as a correct record by the Chair.
P
4/17
17/0079/REM
DAIRY SITE CAR PARK, BISHOP STREET, STOCKTON-ON-TEES
RESERVED MATTERS APPLICATION FOR THE ACCESS, APPEARANCE, LANDSCAPING, LAYOUT AND SCALE, FOR THE ERECTION OF 128 BED HOTEL AND CAR PARK, THE ENHANCEMENT OF THE ADJACENT FORMER DAIRY CAR PARK SITE AND DEMOLITION OF EXISTING KWIK FIT BUILDING.

RESOLVED that planning application 17/0079/REM be approved subject to the following conditions and informatives below;

01 The development hereby approved shall be in accordance with the following approved plan(s);

Plan Reference Number Date on Plan
6981-DR-ATR-002 12 January 2017
6981-DR-ATR-003 12 January 2017
6981-DR-ATR-004 12 January 2017
6981-DR-D-001 REV B 12 January 2017
L-1579-GAP-001 12 January 2017
NSH-COL-00-ZZ-DR-L-3001 12 January 2017
NSH-COL-00-ZZ-DR-L-3002 12 January 2017
NSH-COL-00-ZZ-DR-L-3003 12 January 2017
NSH-RYD-00-00-DR-A-3002 12 January 2017
NSH-RYD-00-B1-DR-A-3001 12 January 2017
NSH-RYD-00-XX-DR-A-0001 12 January 2017
NSH-RYD-00-XX-DR-A-0002 12 January 2017
NSH-RYD-00-XX-DR-A-0003 12 January 2017
NSH-RYD-00-XX-DR-A-3601 12 January 2017
NSH-RYD-00-XX-DR-A-3801 12 January 2017
NSH-RYD-00-XX-DR-A-3802 12 January 2017
NSH-RYD-00-XX-DR-A-3901 12 January 2017
NSH-RYD-00-XX-DR-A-3902 12 January 2017
NSH-RYD-00-ZZ-DR-A-2002 12 January 2017
NSH-RYD-00-ZZ-DR-A-3011 12 January 2017
NSH-RYD-00-ZZ-DR-A-3903 12 January 2017
NSH-RYD-00-ZZ-DR-A-3904 12 January 2017


02 Conditions 16 (Materials), 17 (Boundary Treatment), 18 (Street Furniture), 25 (Soft and Hardstanding Materials), 26 (Soft and Hardstanding Management), 29 (Tree Protection), 43 (Lighting), 45 (Geo-Environmental Assessment), 46 (Further Contamination Finds), 47 (Piling), 49 (Construction Environmental Management Plan) and 50 (Site Waste Management Plan) contained in Planning Approval reference 08/3644/EIS decision dated 20 August 2009 remain to be discharged.

03 Prior to occupation of the Hotel a Car Parking Management Plan (CPMP) shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The CPMP should include the management of both the car park associated with the proposed hotel and the car park to the rear of the hotel site (known as The Dairy car park). The car park management plan shall be implemented as approved at all times thereafter.

INFORMATIVE OF REASON FOR PLANNING APPROVAL

Informative: Working Practices
The Local Planning Authority found the submitted details satisfactory subject to the imposition of appropriate planning conditions and has worked in a positive and proactive manner in dealing with the planning application.
P
5/17
16/3211/OUT
THORPE BECK FARM, DURHAM ROAD, THORPE THEWLES
OUTLINE APPLICATION WITH SOME MATTERS RESERVED FOR THE ERECTION OF UP TO 24 DWELLINGS AND UPGRADING OF SITE ACCESS AND PUBLIC OPEN SPACE (DEMOLITION OF EXISTING BUILDING).

RESOLVED that planning application 16/3211/OUT be approved subject to the following conditions and informative and subject to the applicant entering into a Section 106 Agreement in accordance with the Heads of Terms below;

Approved Plans;
01 The development hereby approved shall be in accordance with the following approved plan(s);

Plan Reference Number Date on Plan
Y81:1009:01 20 December 2016
JN1251-Dwg-0001 20 December 2016

Time limit for submission of the reserved maters;
02 Application for approval of the reserved matters shall be made to the local planning authority not later than three years from the date of this permission.

Time limit for commencement;
03 The development hereby permitted shall begin no later than two years from the date of approval of the last of the reserved matters to be approved.

Reserved matters;
04 Details of the appearance, landscaping, layout, and scale of the development (hereinafter called the reserved matters) shall be in accordance with the details of a scheme to be submitted to, and approved by the Local Planning Authority before development commences.

Dwelling numbers;
05 The total number of dwellings authorised by this permission shall not exceed 24.

Conformity with the submitted masterplan;
06 The details of the reserved matters shall broadly follow the principles and parameters set out on the indicative masterplan drawing Y81:1009.04 Rev E submitted with the planning application.

Entrance to Castle Eden Walkway
07 Notwithstanding the submitted information, no development shall commence until a detailed scheme for a pedestrian linkage to the Castle Eden Walkway has been submitted to and been agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority. Such a scheme shall allow for a suitable pedestrian route and appropriate connections to the existing route; route signage; entrance features; and, a specific timetable (including any phasing) for the agreed works. The agreed scheme shall be implemented in full accordance with those agreed details.

Ecological mitigation;
08 All ecological mitigation measures shall be carried out in accordance with the submitted ecological appraisal & bat survey report prepared by QUANTS environmental Ltd (September 2016) and shall be implemented in full in accordance with the advice and recommendations contained within the document.

Retention of existing trees, shrubs and hedges
09 Notwithstanding the submitted information and prior to commencement of the development, a plan identifying the trees, shrubs and hedges to be retained on the site and an appropriate management plan for those trees, shrubs and hedges shall be submitted to and be agreed by the Local Planning Authority. No tree, shrub or hedge shall be cut down, uprooted or destroyed, topped or lopped other than in accordance with the approved details. Any tree, shrub or hedge planted as a replacement that dies or is removed, uprooted or destroyed or becomes seriously damaged or defective must be replaced by another of the same size and species unless directed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

Site and floor levels;
10 Notwithstanding the information submitted as part of the application details of the proposed site levels and finished floor levels shall be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority prior to the commencement of the development.

10% Renewable energy requirement;
11 No development shall take place until details of how the hereby approved development will meet at least 10% of its predicted energy requirements, on site, from renewable energy sources or other alternative measures such as a fabric first approach, have been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. Development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.

Surface Water Drainage scheme;
12 The development hereby approved shall not be commenced on site, until a scheme of ‘Surface Water Drainage and Management' for the implementation, maintenance and management of the sustainable drainage scheme has first been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The scheme shall be implemented and thereafter managed and maintained in accordance with the approved details, The scheme shall include but not be restricted to providing the following details:

(i) Detailed design of the existing surface water management system for the whole site;
(ii) Detailed design of the proposed surface water management system for the whole site;
(iii) Detailed design of the proposed bund and the proposed receiving pit, this should include proposed storage volume and discharge arrangements to the existing export pit;
(iv) A management plan detailing how surface water runoff from the site will be managed during construction phase;
(v) Management plan for the Surface Water Drainage scheme and any maintenance arrangements;

The building hereby approved shall not be brought into use until the approved ‘Surface Water Drainage' scheme has been implemented and the approved scheme shall be maintained in accordance with the Surface Water Management scheme for the lifetime of the development.

Affordable housing
13 Development shall not begin until a scheme for the provision of affordable housing has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The affordable housing shall deliver 15% of affordable housing provision unless supported by relevant viability evidence or [some allowance for alternative affordable housing offer]

The affordable housing shall be provided in accordance with the approved scheme(s), which shall include:
i. the numbers, type, tenure, mix and location on the site of the affordable housing provision to be made within the relevant phase;
ii. the timing of the construction of the affordable housing and its phasing in relation to the occupancy of the market housing;
iii. the arrangements for the transfer of the affordable housing to an affordable housing provider or to ensure that the affordable housing is affordable to both first and subsequent occupants; ; and
iv. the occupancy criteria to be used for determining the identity of occupiers of the affordable housing, and the means by which such occupancy criteria will be enforced.

Construction Management Plan;
14 No development shall take place, until a Construction Management Plan has been submitted to, and approved in writing by, the local planning authority. The Construction Management Plan shall provide details of:

(i) the site construction access(es)
(ii) the parking of vehicles of site operatives and visitors;
(iii) loading and unloading of plant and materials;
(iv) storage of plant and materials used in constructing the development;
(v) the erection and maintenance of security hoarding including decorative displays and facilities for public viewing,
(vi) measures to be taken to minimise the deposit of mud, grit and dirt on public highways by vehicles travelling to and from the site;
(vii) measures to control and monitor the emission of dust and dirt during construction;
(viii) a Site Waste Management Plan;
(ix) details of the routing of associated HGVs;
(x) measures to protect existing footpaths and verges; and a means of communication with local residents.

The approved Construction Management Plan shall be adhered to throughout the construction period.

Construction activity;
15 No construction activity or deliveries shall take place except between the hours of 0800 and 1800 on Monday to Friday and 0900 and 1300 on Saturdays. There shall be no construction activity on Sundays or Bank Holidays.

Land contamination;
16 An Intrusive Ground Investigation Report (including a Level 1 Ground Contamination Risk Assessment for Human Health and Controlled Waters) must be completed in accordance with a scheme to assess the nature and extent of any contamination on the site (whether or not it originates on the site) to include for ground contamination screening and ground gas production, and an appropriate risk assessment undertaken. The contents of the scheme are subject to the approval in writing of the Local Planning Authority. The investigation and risk assessment must be undertaken by competent persons and a written report of the findings must be produced. The written report is subject to the approval in writing of the Local Planning Authority. The report of the findings must include:

- a survey of the extent, scale and nature of contamination;
- an assessment of the potential risks to human health, property (existing or proposed) including buildings, crops, livestock, pets, woodland and service lines and pipes, adjoining land, groundwater and surface waters, ecological systems, archeological sites and ancient monuments;
- an appraisal of remedial options, and proposal of the preferred option(s).

This must be conducted in accordance with DEFRA and the Environment Agency's ‘Model Procedures for the Management of Land Contamination, CLR 11'.

Highway access arrangements/works;
17 The commencement of the development authorised by this permission shall not begin until:

a. the local planning authority has approved in writing a full scheme of works and improvements to enable:

(i) The provision for the entrance and egress onto Durham Road
(ii) Provision of extending the 30 mph zone beyond the site entrance
(iii) Provision of extending the require street lighting to the site entrance
(iv) Provision of an appropriate pedestrian route linking the development to Thorpe Thewles Village

and

b.the approved works have been completed in accordance with the local planning authority's written approval and have been certified in writing as complete on behalf of the local planning authority; unless alternative arrangements to secure the specified works have been approved in writing by the local planning authority.


Site construction access
18.No development shall take place (except for the purposes of constructing the initial site access) until that part of the access(es) extending 15 metres into the site from the carriageway of the existing highway has been made up and surfaced in accordance with the Councils Design Guide and Specification.


INFORMATIVE OF REASON FOR PLANNING APPROVAL

Informative: Working Practices
The Local Planning Authority has worked in a positive and proactive manner and sought solutions to problems arising in dealing with the planning application by seeking a revised scheme to overcome issues and by the identification and imposition of appropriate planning conditions

HEADS OF TERMS
The applicant will be required to enter into a section 106 agreement to cover the following aspects;

•Contribution towards primary and secondary education in line with Council's adopted formula
•Provision of open space on site or alternatively an commuted lump sum of up to 80,000 for off-site provision
•Local Labour agreement
P
6/17
17/0464/VARY
FAIRFIELD GARAGE, 318 BISHOPTON ROAD WEST, STOCKTON-ON-TEES
SECTION 73 APPLICATION TO VARY CONDITION NO2 (APPROVED PLANS) OF PLANNING APPROVAL 16/1029/FUL- PROPOSED EXTENSION TO REAR, RAISING OF ROOF HEIGHT, AND INSTALLATION OF RETAINING WALL AND 1.8M HIGH TIMBER FENCE TO NORTHERN AND WESTERN BOUNDARY

RESOLVED that application 17/0464/VARY Fairfield Garage, 318 Bishopton Road West, Stockton-on-Tees be deferred to enable Officers to discuss landscaping screening with the Applicant.
P
7/17
17/0014/COU
LAND NORTH EAST OF 16 TO 66, PATTERDALE AVENUE, STOCKTON-ON-TEES
CHANGE OF USE OF LAND AT PATTERDALE AVENUE TO COMMUNITY GARDEN.

RESOLVED that planning application 17/0014/COU be approved subject to the following conditions and informatives below;

01 Time Limit
The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of Three years from the date of this permission.

02 Approved Plans
The development hereby approved shall be in accordance with the following approved plan(s);

Plan Reference Number Date on Plan
SBC0001A 28 February 2017

03 Tree/Hedge retention
No trees, shrubs or hedges within the site shall be felled, uprooted, wilfully damaged or destroyed, cut back in any way or removed without the prior consent in writing of the Local Planning Authority.

INFORMATIVE OF REASON FOR PLANNING APPROVAL

Informative: Working Practices
The Local Planning Authority found the submitted details satisfactory subject to the imposition of appropriate planning conditions and has worked in a positive and proactive manner in dealing with the planning application
P
8/17
1. APPEAL. MARK PAGE - MANOR COTTAGE, DARLINGTON ROAD, ELTON, STOCKTON-ON-TEES, TS21 1AG
16/1181/X - DISMISSED

 
P
9/17
1. APPEAL - CARLINGTON DEVELOPMENTS LTD - LAND AT THORNABY FOOTBALL CLUB, ACKLAM ROAD, THORNABY - 14/2876/OUT - DISMISSED
2. APPEAL - MR FRANK ANDREW - THE CARRS ANGLING LAKES, LETCH LANE, CARLTON, TS21 1ED - 16/1095/OUT - DISMISSED

 
1.30pm

Preamble

ItemPreamble
P
1/17
The Evacuation Procedure was noted.
P
2/17
There were no declarations of interest.
P
3/17
Consideration was given to the minutes of the meeting which was held on the 15th March 2017 for approval and signature.
P
4/17
Consideration was given to a report on planning application 17/0079/REM, Dairy Site Car Park, Bishop Street, Stockton-On-Tees.

The consultees that had been notified and the comments that had been received were detailed within the main report.

Neighbours were notified and the comments received were detailed within the main report.

The planning policies and material planning considerations that were relevant to the consideration of the application were contained within the main report.

The Planning Officers report concluded that material considerations had been considered in detail and 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 would provide economic and social benefits and did not conflict with policies in the Development Plan. It was considered that there were important material benefits arising from the proposed development and that the presumption in favour of sustainable development applied and there were not any adverse impacts from the proposed development that would significantly or demonstrably outweigh the benefits when assessed against the policies in the framework taken as a whole. Therefore the application was accordingly recommended for approval with conditions. Accordingly it was recommended that the application be approved with Conditions for the reasons specified above.

Members were informed that since the publication of the main report an additional comment had been received in support of the application.

An Objector attended the meeting and was given the opportunity to make representation. With the exception of those submissions already provided during the consultation period, and detailed within the report, The objector's comments could be summarised as follows:

Discussion took place around a Freedom of Information Request (FOI) from the Objector which he stated he had not received and therefore made it difficult to make an informed decision.

The Council should not be imposing this proposal on residents of the Borough.

A supporter attended the meeting and was given the opportunity to make representation. With the exception of those submissions already provided during the consultation period, and detailed within the report, the supporters comments could be summarised as follows:

The application should be fully supported by residents. Those opposing the application should put aside their issues and focus on what the proposal would bring to the area.

Members were given the opportunity to ask questions/make comments on the application and these could be summarised as follows:

Discussion took place in relation to the energy efficiency of the premise as it was expected that the Hotel would be very energy dependent. It was suggested that efforts should be made to ensure that the hotel was as ecological as possible as the running costs would have to be met by Stockton Borough Council.

Concerns were raised in relation to the impact of the withdrawal of the Church Square Car Park and the Dairy Site Car Park without a like for like replacement. Assurances were needed for the Councils employees and people who worked in and around Stockton High Street and North Shore. The Riverside Car park offered limited spaces and was out of commission on a number of occasions during the year when events were held there.

Assurances were sought in relation to a Victorian sewer which was located on the site and also on the land owned by Stockton Baptist Tabernacle (SBT) in terms of flooding.

Discussion took place around the need for the hotel to have the necessary security in place to enable the safe coming and going of hotel staff and residents.

Questions were raised in relation to the sequential test which had been carried out.

Officers were given the opportunity to respond to comments/issues raised by Members. Their responses could be summarised as follows:

Where concerns had been raised in relation to the Church Square Car Park, Officers explained that the land was privately owned and could therefore cease to operate as car park at any time and was not a material consideration.

It was confirmed that in terms of energy efficiency the hotel would be a highly sustainable building.

In terms of flooding/ Sewer issues, the Service Water Management team had not raised any objections.

It was acknowledged that security was important for staff and visitors.

In relation to the sequential test this had been undertaken as part of the outline application which had been approved. A further sequential test was not required.

A motion was proposed that the application be deferred to a future Planning Committee meeting.

A vote took place and the motion was not carried.

A vote then took place on the determination of the application and the application was approved.
P
5/17
Consideration was given to a report on planning application 16/3211/OUT Thorpe Beck Farm, Durham Road, Thorpe Thewles.

The consultees that had been notified and the comments that had been received were detailed within the main report.

Neighbours were notified and the comments received were detailed within the main report.

The planning policies and material planning considerations that were relevant to the consideration of the application were contained within the main report.

The Planning Officers report concluded that in view of the details contained within the report and as the Council was only able to demonstrate a 4.5 years housing land supply (with a 20% buffer added) the provision of housing to address the shortfall in the 5 year housing land weighed in favour of the scheme. Although the site lay outside of the defined limits to development it was located adjacent to an existing settlement boundary and would predominately be seen within the context of the wider village and against the backdrop of existing residential development. The intervening distances to adjacent settlements also meant that there was no coalescence of settlements and the openness and amenity value of the strategy gap would be largely unaffected. The associated harm to the character of the open countryside was therefore considered to be limited

In terms of the sustainability of Thorpe Thewles although it was identified as a Tier 3(1) village with limited in village services and ability to access employment/services by sustainable means, this was not adopted policy and could only be given limited weight. Further, recent appeal decisions within a number of the borough's villages (Redmarshall, Cowpen Bewley and Maltby) had demonstrated a subtle but distinct shift as to what constitutes sustainable development in rural areas. In particular the approach of paragraph 55 of the NPPF which encouraged development which supported clusters of smaller settlements and/or services within neighbouring villages. It was also apparent that it was not unreasonable to expect that the majority of journeys would be made via the private car with a number of these appeal decisions taking into consideration whether there were realistic and accessible alternative sustainable modes of transport available. In Thorpe Thewles case it was considered that sufficient choice of alternative modes of transport did exist.

The impacts of the proposal had been considered against national and local planning guidance, the development was an unallocated site located outside the established urban limits and such development would normally be resisted unless material considerations indicated otherwise having regard to the development plan. However the guidance in the NPPF made clear that the Local Planning Authority's existing housing delivery policies could not be considered as up to date as it could not demonstrate a five-year supply of deliverable housing sites. Also housing applications were to be considered in the context of the presumption in favour of sustainable development.

As the application sought only outline planning consent with all matters reserved the final details would be subject to a future application although it was considered that a residential development of up to 24 dwellings could comfortably be accommodated on the site without significantly affecting the character of the village, the neighbouring properties residential amenity or highway safety. The development was also considered to be acceptable in relation to its impacts on flooding and protected species.

In view of the above, it was considered that there are important material benefits arising from the proposed development. Therefore it was considered that the presumption in favour of sustainable development applied and there were not any adverse impacts from the proposed development that would significantly or demonstrably outweigh the benefits when assessed against the policies in the framework taken as a whole. The proposal was considered to be acceptable in planning terms and was recommended for approval subject to conditions and the applicant entering into a section 106 agreement as detailed within the main report.

Objectors attended the meeting and were given the opportunity to make representation. With the exception of those submissions already provided during the consultation period, and detailed within the report, objector's comments could be summarised as follows:

New occupiers of the proposed dwellings would be reliant on cars.

The officers report made reference to appeals in other villages, however not all appeal circumstances were the same.

The developer had ignored the views of local residents.

There was confusion in relation to the Councils view on sustainability due to an application for a single dwelling which was refused as the site was considered unsustainable by nature of limited services.

The Applicant was in attendance at the meeting and given the opportunity to make representation. His comments could be summarised as follows:

The applicant highlighted that the location was right, sustainable and was a quality scheme. There was good natural screening with little or no impact on neighbouring properties. The number of proposed dwellings was right for the site and the applicant was also very keen to work with local residents.

The development would help to sustain the current services within the village.

If the proposal was approved the applicant would have another opportunity to engage with residents at the reserved matters stage.

Officers were given the opportunity to respond to comments/issues raised by Objectors. Their responses could be summarised as follows:

In terms of sustainability, the village study which was undertaken in 2014 carried little weight. There had been a subtle shift in the interpretation of what was a sustainable location for example Paragraph 55 of the NPPF made reference to the clustering of settlements and also where there was a choice of alternative and sustainable modes of transport. On the whole the proposed development would be considered to be sustainable.

Where concerns had been raised relating to walking and cycle paths, there was cycle routes within the vicinity, one being a national cycle route, however pedestrian linkage was more difficult.

Members were given the opportunity to ask questions/make comments on the application and these could be summarised as follows:

Concerns were raised in relation to the safety of access points to the site.

Discussion took place around the limits to development and the fact that approximately 80% of the site was outside the limit to development. One Member expressed reluctance to accept arguments based on the lack of a 5 year housing supply and stated that only 50% of appeals were refused by the Planning Inspector on that basis.

Questions were raised as to how children would access the play area on foot without the provision of pavements.

Officers were given the opportunity to respond to comments/issues raised by Members. Their responses could be summarised as follows:

Officers confirmed that access to the site had been fully assessed and was considered to be appropriate. Access met visibility splays and there was to be a speed limit reduction on approaching the access points.

In terms of the proposed application being outside the limits to development, there had been other developments in the borough that were also outside the limits to development which had been accepted.

Issues around pedestrian connectivity would be considered at reserved matters.

There was an area of Hedgerow which would be able to accommodate a footpath.

A vote then took place and the application was approved.
P
6/17
Consideration was given to a report on planning application 17/0464/VARY Fairfield Garage, 318 Bishopton Road West, Stockton-On-Tees.

The consultees that had been notified and the comments that had been received were detailed within the main report.

Neighbours were notified and the comments received were detailed within the main report.

The planning policies and material planning considerations that were relevant to the consideration of the application were contained within the main report.

The Planning Officers report concluded that overall, it was considered that due to the minor level of changes proposed the impact of the amended scheme would not be significant and it was recommended that the application be approved with conditions for the reasons specified within the main report.

Prior to the commencement of the meeting additional correspondence had been received from a local resident objecting to the application to vary. The objectors main issues were regarding a site visit and the adequacy of the agreed 1.8 metre fence from the previously approved application. The Planning Officers recommendation remained unchanged from the main report.

Objectors attended the meeting and were given the opportunity to make representation. With the exception of those submissions already provided during the consultation period, and detailed within the report, objector's comments could be summarised as follows:

The garage was operating outside its permitted operating times.

This was not the right place for an industrial unit.

The original panning application was for an extension to the existing building. The development was built around the existing building and the existing building was demolished, therefore was not an extension but a new build.

Concerns were highlighted in relation to noise and fumes coming from the building.

Councillor Bill Woodhead, Ward Councillor for Fairfield addressed the Committee, explaining that the photographs presented during the Committee meeting did not show the true impact on the street scene. Councillor Woodhead informed that the Committee would need a site visit to fully appreciate how obtrusive the development was and requested a deferment to allow this to happen.

Councillor Maurice Perry, Ward Councillor for Fairfield highlighted that the size of the building had not fully been appreciated in terms of the impact on amenity and street scene and agreed with Councillor Woodhead that a deferment should be agreed to enable a site visit.

Officers were given the opportunity to respond to comments/issues raised by Objectors. Their responses could be summarised as follows:

With the exception of the buildings 200mm increase in height and the addition of 2 pedestrian access doors on both side elevations with changes to the existing glazed front to include areas of brickwork, the rest of the development was entirely in accordance with consent.

Conditions were included to mitigate against noise.

Members were given the opportunity to ask questions/make comments on the application and these could be summarised as follows:

Discussion took place around concerns relating to the size of the building, noise, fumes, impact on amenity.

Suggestions were made that screening be provided to obscure the building as much as was practicably possible and that a condition be included.

Some Members felt that had the proposed application been submitted originally then the application would not have gained approval.

There had been a lack of consultation with residents.

It looked like a new build not an extension as was agreed originally.

Officers were given the opportunity to respond to comments/issues raised by Objectors. Their responses could be summarised as follows:

Officers confirmed that the back elevation of the building had not been increased and therefore accorded with the original approval.

The Chief Solicitor explained to the Committee that the original application would stand and the best that could be achieved was to reduce the extended roof height to 6 metres. Any additional landscaping could not be added on to the application. There was still a 1.8 metre fence to be erected which was conditioned on the original application and was the only boundary which could be considered for screening. If Members were minded to refuse the application then they would have to state what the significant harm would be however this could not impact on the original permission.

A motion was proposed to defer the determination of the application to enable officers to discuss landscaping screening with the applicant. The motion was seconded, a vote took place and the motion was carried.
P
7/17
Consideration was given to a report on planning application 17/0014/COU Land North East Of 16 To 66, Patterdale Avenue, Stockton-On-Tees.

The consultees that had been notified and the comments that had been received were detailed within the main report.

Neighbours were notified and the comments received were detailed within the main report.

The planning policies and material planning considerations that were relevant to the consideration of the application were contained within the main report.

The Planning Officers report concluded that overall it was considered that the proposed development accorded with planning policy within the Development Plan and National Planning Policy Framework and it was considered that there would be no adverse impact on the character of the area or neighbouring properties. It was also considered that the development would not have an adverse impact on highway safety and therefore there were no material considerations which indicated that the determination should not be in accordance with the Development Plan. It was therefore recommended that the application be Approved with Conditions for the reasons specified within the main report.

Members considered the report and appendices. A vote took place and the application was approved.
P
8/17
The Appeal was noted.
P
9/17
The Appeals were noted.

Can't find it

Can't find what you're looking for? Let us know and we'll do our best to point you in the right direction