Stockton-on-Tees Borough Council

Big plans, bright future

Planning Committee Minutes

Date:
Wednesday, 4th April, 2007
Time:
1.30pm
Place:
Lecture Theatre, Stockton Library, The Square, Stockton-on-Tees
 
Please note: all Minutes are subject to approval at the next Meeting

Attendance Details

Present:
(Meeting) Cllr M Cherrett (Chairman), Cllr Mrs J Beaumont, Cllr D T Brown, Cllr Mrs A Cains (vice Cllr P Kirton) Cllr D Cains, Cllr K Dixon (vice Cllr K Faulks), Cllr J Fletcher (vice Cllr Mrs M Rigg), Cllr K Leonard, Cllr M Perry, Cllr F G Salt, Cllr M Smith, Cllr M E Womphrey.

(Site Visit) Cllr M Stoker (Chairman), Cllr Mrs J Beaumont, Cllr M Cherrett, Cllr J Fletcher (vice Cllr Mrs M Rigg), Cllr K Leonard, Cllr F G Salt, Cllr M E Womphrey.
Officers:
(Meeting) B Jackson, C Straughan, J Salisbury, R McGuckin, M Robinson (DNS); S Johnson, J Butcher (LD).

(Site Visit) B Jackson, S Pilkington, D James, J Salisbury (DNS).
In Attendance:
Applicants, Agents and members of the public.
Apologies for absence:
(Meeting) Cllr K Faulks, Cllr P Kirton, Cllr R Patterson, Cllr Mrs M Rigg, Cllr R Rix, Cllr M Stoker, Cllr S Walmsley.

(Site Visit) Cllr D T Brown, Cllr D Cains, Cllr K Faulks, Cllr P Kirton, Cllr R Patterson, Cllr M Perry, Cllr Mrs M Rigg, Cllr R Rix, Cllr M Smith, Cllr S Walmsley.
Item Description Decision
Public
1213 DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST
 Councillor Mrs Beaumont declared a personal/non-prejudicial interest in respect of item 07/0375/FUL Stockton High Street next to the Shambles - erection of outdoor cafe and seating terrace, due to being a member of Markets Forum.
1214 07/0226/OUT
LAND AT FORMER COMMUNITY CENTRE, ADJACENT TO LENNOX CRESCENT BILLINGHAM
REVISED OUTLINE APPLICATION FOR TWO-STOREY APARTMENT BUILDING COMPRISING 4NO. APARTMENTS AND ASSOCIATED PARKING.
Preamble
RESOLVED that planning application 07/0226/OUT be refused for the following reason:

1. In the opinion of the Local Planning Authority the proposed development will result in the loss of an area used as a public open space/amenity area and would thereby be detrimental to the character and amenities of the area contrary to Policy HO3 of the Adopted Stockton on Tees Local Plan.
1215 07/0125/X
REAR OF NORTON HIGH STREET, BACK OF HEALTH CENTRE AND ADJACENT ALLOTMENTS
APPLICATION TO FELL 5 NO. PEAR TREES, 2 NO. SYCAMORE TREES, 1 NO. ASH TREE AND 1 NO. RED HORSE CHESTNUT TREE
STOCKTON ON TEES BOROUGH COUNCIL (LAND OFF NORTON HIGH STREET, STOCKTON ON TEES) TREE PRESERVATION ORDER 2006 NO 653

Preamble
RESOLVED that consent to fell made under application number 07/0125/X be granted subject to the following conditions:

1. The development hereby approved shall be in accordance with the following approved plan(s): unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority.
Plan Reference Number SBC0002
Date on Plan 13 February 2007.

2. The work hereby approved shall be solely the felling of: -

T3525 Sycamore Tree
T3527 - T3530 Pear Trees
T3543 Red Horse Chestnut Tree
T3545 Ash Tree
T3560 Sycamore
T3565 Pear
as identified on drawing number SBC 0002.

3. All trees that are felled shall be replaced with a specimen or a type and species to be agreed with the Local Planning Authority, before the removal of the trees and which shall be planted within the first planting season following the removal of the trees. Should any replacement tree die, become damaged or diseased within five years it shall in turn be replaced within the first planting season following its demise with a species to be agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority.

4. All works to be carried out in accordance with arboricultural best practices to a minimum standard of BS3998 Tree Works: Specifications.
1216 07/0523/FUL
7 BRAEWORTH CLOSE, YARM, STOCKTON-ON-TEES
ERECTION OF A 2-STOREY EXTENSION TO THE SIDE & SINGLE STOREY EXTENSION TO THE REAR AND SIDE

Preamble
RESOLVED that planning application 07/0523/FUL be approved subject to the following conditions:

1. The development hereby approved shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plan(s); unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority.
Drawing Number(s): -SBC001, SBC001A, SBC001B

2. Construction of the external walls and roof shall not commence until details of the materials to be used in the construction of the external surfaces of the structures hereby permitted have been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. Development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.
1217 07/0375/FUL
STOCKTON HIGH STREET NEXT TO THE SHAMBLES,
ERECTION OF OUTDOOR CAFE AND SEATING TERRACE
Preamble
RESOLVED that planning application 07/0375/FUL be deferred until the next Planning Committee meeting, in order to incorporate the comments of the Markets Forum and the Environmental Health Unit Manager.

(Councillor Mrs Beaumont declared a personal/non-prejudicial interest in the above item, due to being a member of Markets Forum.)
1218 07/0525/REV
64 BRISBANE GROVE, STOCKTON-ON-TEES,
REVISED APPLICATION FOR TWO STOREY SIDE AND REAR EXTENSIONS

Preamble
RESOLVED that planning application 07/0525/REV be deferred for a site visit.
1219 PLANNING OBLIGATIONS SUPPLEMENTARY PLANNING DOCUMENT
Preamble
RECOMMENDED that:

1. The contents of the report be noted.

2. The draft Planning Obligations SPD for public consultation, subject to any amendments from internal consultees, be agreed.

3. Minor amendments to the content of the document, prior to the public consultation period, be delegated to officers.
1220 SAVED STRUCTURE AND LOCAL PLAN POLICIES
Preamble
RECOMMENDED that:

1. The request of the Tees Valley Joint Strategy Committee that the North of England Assembly asks the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government to extend the life of the Tees Valley Structure Plan policies, until the Secretary of State approves View: Shaping the North-East (the new Regional Spatial Strategy) or until the matters covered can be considered through the local development frameworks of the Tees Valley authorities be endorsed.

2. The revised schedule of saved Local Plan policies be agreed.
1221 LOCAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK:TEES VALLEY JOINT STRATEGY UNIT MINERALS AND WASTE CORE STRATEGY AND SITE ALLOCATIONS DPD - ISSUES AND OPTIONS REPORT AND SUSTAINABILITY APPRAISAL SCOPING REPORT
Preamble
RECOMMENDED that:

1. The Production of Minerals and Waste Development Plan Documents for the Tees Valley Issues and Options Report and the Sustainability Appraisal of Waste and Minerals Development Plan Scoping Report for public consultation be endorsed.
1222 1. APPEAL - PETER AND STEVEN BELL - 69 HIGH STREET YARM TS15 9BH - 06/1958/COU - DISMISSED

  
1.30/3.50

Preamble

ItemPreamble
1214Consideration was given to a report that sought outline planning permission for the erection of a two storey apartment building comprising 4 apartments and associated parking to the rear and other ancillary development. At the time of the meeting the application site was a vacant plot of land located within a residential area of Billingham. The site was formerly occupied by a single storey community centre.

The application was deferred for a site visit at the Planning Committee on 14th March 2007 to enable Members to visit the site before determining the proposal.

The application was a revision to application 06/3791/OUT, which sought outline permission for the erection of one block of development housing 6 apartments. The previous scheme was withdrawn to address concerns raised by officers with respect to the scale of the building and its impacts on the surrounding area.

Letters of objection had been received from 15 neighbouring households in respect to the proposed development. The main objections related to highway safety, loss of open space, impact on the street scene and over development of the site. In addition to the letters of objection, the applicant was an employee of Stockton Borough Council and therefore the application needed to be determined by the Planning Committee.

Members of the Committee raised concerns over the proposed development. On the whole Members felt that the proposed development would result in the loss of an area used as public open space.

The Ward Councillor was in attendance at the meeting and spoke against the application.

The agent for the application was in attendance at the meeting and was given the opportunity to outline his case. A member of the public spoke against the application.
1215Consideration was given to a report that sought consent to fell 9 trees that were a mixture of Sycamore, Pear, Ash and Red Horse Chestnut. At the time of the meeting the trees were located to the rear of Norton High Street. It was alleged that the specimens were dead, dying, diseased, decaying or in poor form with a short life expectancy.

The Tree Preservation Order on this site was made on 31st October 2006 and confirmed on 2nd February 2007, as the trees were considered worthy of protection for reasons of their visual amenity, and at the time afforded protection to the trees, which were considered to be under threat of felling by developers.

Nine letters of objections to the proposal had been received from residents in the area on the grounds that there was insufficient justification to fell the trees - in that the trees were not is such a poor condition (and would in any case provide a habitat in a poor condition), the loss of wildlife, loss of wildlife habitat, loss of outlook and views from neighbouring properties, loss of environmental quality, loss of historic trees, detrimental impact on the quality of life, loss of skyline and well being of the village, and loss of screening to (road) A19 and Billingham Road. There was some support for replacement planting if felling took place.

The Council’s Arboricultural Officer had visited the site and considered that the trees were in poor condition and supported their removal subject to replacement planting.

Members were presented with an update report that outlined the comments received from the Building Control Officer and were also made aware of comments in a poem by two objectors who were unable to attend the meeting but asked that the Committee were made aware of its contents.

On the whole it was considered that having regard to the condition of the trees and the limited impact of their loss on amenity, the trees should be removed in the interest of good arboricultural management of the site. The scheme would have a positive impact on the contribution of the group to local amenity as the replacement planting would be properly located and managed for long term health.

The applicant was in attendance at the meeting and was given the opportunity to outline her case.
1216Consideration was given to a report that sought planning permission for the erection of a two-storey extension to the side and a single storey extension to the rear of the property. The application also proposed to link the existing detached double garage to the main property with a single storey side extension. At the time of the meeting the application site was a detached dwelling located on a cul-de-sac in a residential area to the southeast of Yarm.

The application sought to overcome the reasons for refusal in previous planning applications by dropping the two-storey rear extension and reducing the height of the single storey link extension to the side of the property.

Letters of objection had been received from 6 neighbouring households in respect to the proposed development. The main objections related to the impact on street scene, the scale and proportion of the extensions, loss of privacy, overshadowing effects and the unacceptable overbearing impact.

Members of the Committee were presented with an update report that outlined a correction to the plan shown at appendix 3 of the main report. The plan at appendix 3 should have referred to plan number SBC001B and not plan number SJR 06.47 101. Members were advised that the amended plan demonstrated a reduced ridge height of 0.3m, with the front elevation of the extension set back 0.75m from the front elevation of the dwelling.

On the whole Members considered that the proposed extensions were of a scale, design and proportion that complemented the existing dwelling, and would not have an adverse impact on the street scene. The design and layout would maintain the privacy of the occupants of existing dwellings and would not dominate or overshadow neighbouring properties. It was also considered that the proposed development would retain sufficient amenity space at the existing dwelling.
1217Consideration was given to a report that sought planning permission for the erection of an outdoor café and seating terrace at land in between the Shambles and Market Cross, Stockton High Street. The area was formerly used as underground toilets and had been paved as highway land and was used by market stalls on market days.

A review of the market layout was underway and it had been established that the area would not be used to site stalls in the future regardless of the outcome of the application. The purpose behind the proposal was to contribute to the development of a high quality town centre environment that encouraged shoppers and visitors to increase the length of their stay and the amount of money they spent in Stockton Town Centre.

Members of the Committee raised concerns over the proposal relating to comments from the Markets Forum. Members acknowledged that the plans for the realignment of the market stalls were yet to be presented at the Forum and felt that they would benefit from having the comments of the Forum. The Committee also felt that they needed the comments of the Environmental Health Unit Manager in the report. The Committee agreed to defer the item to the next Planning Committee in order for the above comments to be included.

The Stockton Town Centre Manager was in attendance at the meeting and addressed the Committee.

A representative from Markets Forum was in attendance at the meeting and was given the opportunity to outline his case.
1218Consideration was given to a report that sought planning permission for the erection of a two-storey extension to the side and rear of 64 Brisbane Grove. At the time of the meeting the application site was a two storey semi-detached dwelling house adjoining the grounds of Hartburn Primary School.

It was a revised application with part of the two-storey extension to the rear having been reduced in size and the access widened with the remaining boundary wall to be retained.

A total of 6 letters of objection had been received from nearby residents in response to the neighbour consultation. The main objections related to the size and use of the proposed extension, the car parking area to the front and its effect on traffic, the impact on the street scene and also the impact that the development would have on the trees which were covered by a preservation order.

Objections had been received from the Ward Councillors, Councillor Johnson and Councillor Wade.

Members of the Committee raised concerns over the development in relation to over development of the site, the size of the rear extension and also the impact of the proposed development on the street scene. Members were informed that other properties in the street have similar extensions to that proposed by the application. Members requested that the application be deferred for a site visit in order that they could view the property in relation to the street scene.

The applicant was in attendance at the meeting and was given the opportunity to outline her case.

The Ward Councillor was in attendance at the meeting and objected to the proposed development.
1219Members considered a report that presented the draft Planning Obligations Supplementary Planning Document (SPD). The Council's Local Development Scheme (LDS) required the production of a SPD. Members were advised that the purpose of the SPD was to set out the Council's approach to Planning Obligations (also known as S 106 agreements) within the Borough. The intention of SPD documents was to expand on existing higher-level policies, such as those in the Adopted Local Plan, Alteration Number 1, and to be consistent with national and regional policies. SPDs did not form part of the statutory development plan, but were a material consideration in determining planning applications.
1220Members considered a report that presented the saved policies exercise that was being carried out with regard to the Tees Valley Structure Plan and of the proposed revision to the schedule of saved policies for the Stockton-on-Tees Local Plan in the light of further guidance from the Government Office for the North East (GONE).
1221Members were presented with a report that provided an update on the progress of the production of the Joint Minerals and Waste Development Plan Documents (DPDs) and that sought endorsement of the Issues and Options Report and Sustainability Scoping Report for public consultation. Members were presented with both of the reports for information.

  • Contact

  • Democratic Services

    Municipal Buildings
    Church Road
    Stockton-on-Tees
    TS18 1LD

  • 01642 526193 or 01642 528173

  • [email protected]

My Stockton Logout

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