Agenda and draft minutes

Councillor J Foster, Vice-Chair Planning in the Chair advised of the procedure to be followed during the planning part of the meeting.

Apologies for absence were received from Councillor Dickinson, Jones and Wearmouth.

Minutes of the meeting of the Castle Morpeth Local Area Council held on Monday 13 March 2023, as circulated, to be confirmed as a true record and signed by the Chair.

RESOLVED that the minutes of the meeting of the Castle Morpeth Local Area Council held on Monday 13 March 2023, as circulated, be confirmed as a true record and be signed by the Chair.

Unless already entered in the Council’s Register of Members’ interests, members are required where a matter arises at a meeting; 

1. Which directly relates to Disclosable Pecuniary Interest (‘DPI’) as set out in Appendix B, Table 1 of the Code of Conduct, to disclose the interest, not participate in any discussion or vote and not to remain in room. Where members have a DPI or if the matter concerns an executive function and is being considered by a Cabinet Member with a DPI they must notify the Monitoring Officer and arrange for somebody else to deal with the matter.

2. Which directly relates to the financial interest or well being of a Other Registrable Interest as set out in Appendix B, Table 2 of the Code of Conduct to disclose the interest and only speak on the matter if members of the public are also allowed to speak at the meeting but otherwise must not take part in any discussion  or vote on the matter and must not remain the room.

3. Which directly relates to their financial interest or well-being  (and is not  DPI) or the financial well being of a relative or close associate, to declare the interest and members may only speak on the matter if members of the public are also allowed to speak. Otherwise, the member must not take part in discussion or vote on the matter and must leave the room.

4. Which affects the financial well-being of the member, a relative or close associate or a body included under the Other Registrable Interests column in Table 2, to disclose the interest and apply the test set out at paragraph 9 of Appendix B before deciding whether they may remain in the meeting.

5. Where Members have or a Cabinet Member has an Other Registerable Interest or Non Registerable Interest in a matter being considered in exercise of their executive function, they must notify the Monitoring Officer and arrange for somebody else to deal with it. 

NB Any member needing clarification must contact monitoringofficer@northumberland.gov.uk.  Members are referred to the Code of Conduct which contains the matters above in full. Please refer to the guidance on disclosures at the rear of this agenda letter.

In relation to agenda item 8, Councillor Dodd advised that whilst he was a customer at the Beresford Arms he had no financial or any other kind of interest and would take part in deciding the application.

In relation to agenda item 7, Councillor Sanderson advised that he had a personal but not prejudicial interest and whilst he would not leave the Chamber, he would take no part in deciding the application.

The purpose of this report is to seek a decision from the Local Area Council as to whether or not they wish the County Council to confirm the provisional  Northumberland County Council (Land at Hebron Hill Farm Hebron, Morpeth, Northumberland) Tree Preservation Order 2023 (No 01 of 2023). 

THE NORTHUMBERLAND COUNTY COUNCIL (LAND AT HEBRON HILL FARM HEBRON, MORPETH, NORTHUMBERLAND) TREE PRESERVATION ORDER 2023 (NO 01 OF 2023) 

A late representation was circulated to Members of the Committee and public speaker and time allowed for this to be read.  A copy has been uploaded to the Council’s website with the Committee papers.

An introduction to the report was provided by J Murphy, with the aid of a power point presentation. 

W Sharp addressed the Committee speaking in objection to the confirmation of the Tree Preservation Order (TPO).  His comments included the following:-

·       A TPO had two principal components, amenity and expediency. Amenity – was there a reasonable degree of public benefit.  Visibility was not sufficient to warrant an Order and even if amenity was sufficient a TPO still might not be required if there was no expediency. Expediency – was there a risk to the trees; was there good woodland management.

·       On the TPO under the reasons for making the order it stated that the trees were “prominent features in the surrounding landscape”; “valuable visual assets”; and “contribute to visual amenity”, however contribution was not a reasonable degree.  The only recognised benefit was visibility and the law stated that was not sufficient.   There was only one factor relied upon, out of a list of 20 in the law and there were no valid reasons for this TPO.

·       What was not included in a legal document was as important as what was included and missing words, by law, were to be assumed to be deliberately missing.  There was no mention of expediency or woodland management as there were no issues.  The residents had proven to the Council that there was no risk to trees and there was exceptional woodland management and the Council clearly agreed otherwise expediency would be stated in the Order.

·       The legal document was insufficient and the Order must not be confirmed.  There was insufficient amenity and no expediency and there were many other reasons why the TPO should not be confirmed. Multiple industry qualified experts also agreed that there should not be a TPO. 

·       It was clear that the TPO document was legally insufficient and the Council recommending a TPO was a serious error of reasoning.

·       The officer report should have fairly and impartially summarised the details, but unfortunately it did not do that.  It was incomplete, inaccurate and biased, and like the late unlawful representation inaccurate.  It ignored objections which were listed and not answered, ignored multiple experts and ignored TPO law.  There were new comments such as expediency which did not match the TPO.

·       The TPO legal document and the report were totally different and after months of investigation the Council’s sole evidence to support such a substantial change of opinion was the original public hearsay, which had proven to be false. The Council believed public hearsay over multiple industry qualified experts. 

·       A TPO was for the public but the sole evidence to support the TPO was not in the public interest and  ...  view the full minutes text for item 108.

To request the committee to decide the planning applications attached to this report using the powers delegated to it. 

Please note that printed letters of objection/support are not circulated with the agenda but are available on the Council’s website at  http://www.northumberland.gov.uk/Planning.aspx

The report requested the Committee to decide the planning applications attached to the report using the powers delegated to it. Members were reminded of the principles which should govern their consideration of the applications, the procedure for handling representations, the requirement of conditions and the need for justifiable reasons for the granting of permission or refusal of planning applications.

Redevelopment of existing land and buildings and the erection of 6No dwellings

Katerdene , Fulbeck, Morpeth, NE61 3JX

Redevelopment of existing land and buildings and the erection of 6No dwellings

Katerdene , Fulbeck, Morpeth, NE61 3JX

R Laughton, Senior Planning Officer provided an introduction to the report with the aid of a power point presentation.  A further letter of objection had been received regarding the increase in traffic and the unsuitability of Fulbeck Road for heavy traffic or pedestrians due to the lack of footpath and limited street lighting.

A Byard, addressed the Committee on behalf of Morpeth Town Council (MTC) speaking in objection to the application.  Her comments included the following:-

·       MTC had objected to the previous application which was refused and whilst noting the changes the reasons for the original objections still stood in that the application was contrary to Morpeth Neighbourhood Plan (MNP) Policies Sus1 and Set1 and paragraph 79 of the NPPF.

·       There were no services or facilities and would therefore be reliant on cars and therefore did not support services nearby in a sustainable method which was contrary to Sus1 of the MNP and the NPPF as it did not promote sustainable development in a rural area.

·       The site was not defined as brownfield or as agricultural development, was within the Green Belt and did not meet rural housing needs.

·       It was inappropriate and harmful development in the Green Belt and constitutes encroachment.

·       The harm to the Green Belt was not outweighed by very special circumstances contrary to the NPPF.

·       The development did not protect, enhance or respect the character of the site and its rural surroundings and was contrary to DS1 of the MPN. 

·       Additional windfall houses were not needed in Morpeth and the location traffic on Holly Lane where there was no pavement or lighting and impact on pedestrian safety.

·       MTC requested that the application be refused.

T Michie, the applicant, addressed the Committee speaking in support of the application.  His comments included the following:-

·       The report summarised where it had changed from the last application in that the size of the site and number of units being proposed had reduced as Members had decided the previously proposed development was too large.  He had worked with the Planning Department to find a suitable scheme and was pleased to see that it was now recommended for approval. 

·       There were now to be 6 units in an existing yard.

·       The proposed development was sustainable and fit into the MNP with the new scheme not impacting into open countryside or road network.  It would use an existing access and highways had requested the removal of a proposed footpath.

·       Initially the properties were to have garages however these have been removed and had been replaced with cycle sheds and the footprint of the buildings decreased on the site.

·       The mitigation planting scheme had been developed through discussions with Planning Officers.

·       The development was in line with policies and the application now matched what had been requested through working with the Council.

In response to questions from Members of the Committee, the following information was  ...  view the full minutes text for item 110.

Part conversion of existing public house to form three additional guest bedrooms to rear and retain public house at smaller scale (Amended Description).

Beresford Arms, South Side, Whalton NE61 3UZ

Part conversion of existing public house to form three additional guest bedrooms to rear and retain public house at smaller scale (Amended Description).

Beresford Arms, South Side, Whalton NE61 3UZ

C Harvey, Senior Planning Officer provided an introduction to the report with the aid of a power point presentation.  He advised that policy ECN14 in Condition 7 should be changed to read ECN15.

R Hobson, applicant, addressed the Committee speaking in support of the application.  His comments included the following:-

·       Hospitality had been extremely hard hit by Covid and the financial crisis. As pub owners, they were proud to be at the centre of the community supporting village activities and employing 15 dedicated staff and were dedicated to maintaining the Beresford Arms as a village asset.

·       Post Covid there had been a Plan B in case hospitality did not recover and permission had been gained to convert the B&B and events room at the rear of the buildings to two houses. However there was now a way forward to develop the business with additional accommodation, bringing more visitors to Northumberland, increasing tourism and promoting colleagues in local businesses.

·       The additional accommodation of 2 double rooms, one being accessible, would double the accommodation revenue and place the business on a solid footing for the future.

·       When making initial inquiries we were advised that planning permission would need to be resubmitted for the conversion with the time line for a decision being early February. Highways had a concern which was addressed to their satisfaction and it was well after the February deadline when the Heritage Officer objected to the existing structure of the external fire escape that was necessary for fire regulations and had been in place for over 20 years. 

·       The fire escape was not visible from the outside, the car park or the highway, to the public or neighbours or even patrons in the back beer garden and was only visible to patrons who were actually in the top garden.

·       Delays had been caused to local workmen and businesses who were going to undertake the work and we had been unable to give any indication of a timeline to rebook their services for at least 8 weeks of work. If we had been able to start in February as planned then we would have been using the additional accommodation with the essential income to ensure that the business and village community asset continued to remain open.  As a business we are now losing in excess of £3,000 per week of vital income which was unsustainable.

·       Mr Harvey, Planning Officer was thanked for his work in helping them understand the nuances of the process and as the Conservation Officers comments were over an existing structure which was a legal requirement then the Committee were asked to support the application allowing work to commence as soon as possible.

There were no questions to Officers from Members of the Committee.

Councillor Towns proposed approval of the application in line with the recommendation  ...  view the full minutes text for item 111.

Variation of Condition 2 (Approved Plans)  in order to reduce the scope of the scheme by omitting the extension and one yard and be amending the layout of another yard on approved application 22/01227/FUL

Kyloe House, Netherton Park, Stannington, Morpeth

Northumberland

NE61 6EF

Variation of Condition 2 (Approved Plans)  in order to reduce the scope of the scheme by omitting the extension and one yard and be amending the layout of another yard on approved application 22/01227/FUL

Kyloe House, Netherton Park, Stannington, Morpeth, Northumberland NE61 6EF

S Milne, Senior Planning Officer introduced the report to the Committee with the aid of a power point presentation.

Councillor Darwin proposed acceptance of the recommendation to approve the application in line with the report which was seconded by Councillor Sanderson.   A vote was taken on the proposal and it was unanimously

RESOLVED that the application be GRANTED for the reasons and with the conditions as outlined in the report.

For Members’ information to report the progress of planning appeals.  This is a monthly report and relates to appeals throughout all 5 Local Area Council Planning Committee areas and covers appeals of Strategic Planning Committee. 

In discussing the purpose of the report and if any learning could be achieved, it was agreed that Members found the report useful and would like to continue to receive this.   Members were advised that whilst costs were rarely awarded against the Council any learning would be picked up in training sessions and would not be discussed at Committee. 

RESOLVED that the information be noted.

A short break was held at this point in order to allow officers to leave/join the meeting. 

To reply to any questions received from members of the public which have been submitted in writing in advance of the meeting. Questions can be asked about issues for which the Council has a responsibility. (Public question times take place on a bimonthly basis at Local Area Council meetings: in January, March, May, July, September and November each year.)

As agreed by the County Council in February 2012, the management of local public question times is at the discretion of the chair of the committee.

Please note however that a question may possibly be rejected if it requires the disclosure of any categories of confidential or exempt information, namely information:

1. relating to any individual;
2. which is likely to reveal the identity of an individual;
3. relating to the financial or business affairs of any particular person
4. relating to any labour relations matters/negotiations;
5. restricted to legal proceedings
6. about enforcement/enacting legal orders
7. relating to the prevention, investigation of prosecution of crime.
   
   

And/or:

?      is defamatory, frivolous or offensive;

?      it is substantially the same as a question which has been put at a meeting of this or another County Council committee in the past six months;

?      the request repeats an identical or very similar question from the same person;

?      the cost of providing an answer is disproportionate;

?      it is being separately addressed through the Council's complaints process;

?      it is not about a matter for which the Council has a responsibility or which affects the county;

?      it relates to planning, licensing and/or other regulatory applications

?      it is a question that town/parish councils would normally be expected to raise through other channels.

If the Chair is of the opinion that a question is one which for whatever reason, cannot properly be asked in an area meeting, he/she will disallow it and inform the resident of his/her decision.

Copies of any written answers (without individuals' personal contact details) will be provided for members after the meeting and also be publicly available.

Democratic Services will confirm the status of the progress on any previously requested written answers and follow up any related actions requested by the Local Area Council.

No questions had been submitted.

This item is to receive any new petitions. The lead petitioner handing in a petition at the meeting is entitled to briefly introduce their petition, and a response to any petitions received will then be organised for a future meeting;

(a)    Receive any new petitions: No new petitions have been received.

(b)   Consider reports on petitions previously received:

Island outside Blossom Park, Pegswood

The attached report is in relation to a petition received in respect of the perceived on-going highways safety issues related to the traffic island introduced as part of the off-site highway works associated with the new development named Blossom Park, Pegswood.

(c)    Receive any updates on petitions for which a report was previously   considered:

Petition Against On-Going Planning Issues And Environmental Destruction On Land To The South Of St Mary’s Park, Stannington

A report had been brought to the Castle Morpeth Committee on 10th October 2022 in respect of a petition that had been received from residents of St Mary‘s Park, Stannington.  The petition was in respect of on-going planning issues within the site.  The attached report outlines an update of progress since October.

(a) Receive New Petitions –  No new petitions had been received. 

(b) Petitions Previously Received – Island outside Blossom Park, Pegswood

M Patrick, Highways Development Manager provided an introduction to the report which outlined the actions to be taken in response to a petition of 329 signatures which raised a series of concerns pertaining to the traffic island to the west of the entrance to Blossom Park, Pegswood.  The residents felt that the introduction of the traffic island had created a highway safety issue resulting in accidents and requesting action to be taken to rectify the situation.

Councillor Towns, the Ward Member advised that whilst the issue had already been raised and was being investigated, he welcomed the petition as it let the Council know the strength of feeling on this matter.   The traffic island had been damaged and had been surrounded by cones for over 12 months.  It was noted that whilst residents wished to see the island removed before the end of the summer and whilst these expectations should be managed, he would like the matter resolved as soon as possible.  It was clarified that there was no timescale for resolution at the current time.

RESOLVED that the actions proposed to be undertaken as set out in the report be accepted.

(c) Updates on Petitions previously received – On-going Planning Issues and Environmental Destruction on land to the South of St Mary’s Park, Stannington.

J Murphy, Planning Area Manager - Development Management introduced the report which outlined the progress since the previous report (October 2022) with photographs shown comparing the site now to those taken following receipt of the petition.   She advised that Officers had walked the site with Bellway Officers on two separate occasions, the first being to understand the extent of the issues and the second to observe the subsequent improvement and progress made.  Two fresh planning applications had been made to address some of the matters and these would be brought to this Committee in June 2023.  A site visit would be undertaken in respect of these applications and Members would be able to see the progress for themselves.

Officers advised that they understood Members frustrations but it was common for developers of large sites to take time to comply with all conditions on an application, with work undertaken by the Council to ensure that all conditions were complied with.   The Developer was now taking the matter seriously and a representative was in attendance.  The Council were working in partnership with the Developer to progress this. 

RESOLVED that the proposed actions set out in the report be accepted and it be noted that Planning Officers were proactively monitoring the site.

To receive a verbal update from the Area Managers from Technical Services and Neighbourhood Services in attendance about any key recent, ongoing and/or future planned Local Services work for the attention of members of the Local Area Council, who will also then have the opportunity to raise issues with the Area Managers.

The Area Managers have principal responsibility for highway services and environmental services, such as refuse collection, street cleansing and grounds maintenance, within the geographic boundaries of the Local Area Council.

P Lowes, Neighbourhood Services Area Manager provided an update report as follows:-

Waste Service  - Residual and recycling waste collection services continued to perform well.  Demand for the bulky waste service remained high but performance was good. Garden waste service was up and running, adjusted routes were bedding in and overall the service was performing well.   

Grass Cutting - Summer seasonal staff started at the beginning of April and had settled in well.  Core grass cutting started early April. The very wet start along with the bank holidays had been challenging for the teams, but work continued to bring the grass up to standard. 

 
Weed Control - The spraying of obstacles to aid in the grass cutting had been undertaken and would continue going forward.  A good start had also been made on the hard surface weed control and this would continue to be progressed as quickly as possible.  

Verge Cutting – This would start within the next month with the work running through June and July.  Cutting schedules remain unchanged from last year and if a return would be made to areas if re-growth caused any visibility issues.

It was confirmed that the glass and food waste collection trials had been well received and were continuing.  An update would be requested on problems with refuse collection around Gordon Terrace West.  It was highlighted that feedback from residents on the wild flower areas had been positive.  The Officer was unable to clarify the position regarding the possible cessation of glass collections which had been raised at a meeting of Ponteland Town Council. Clarification would also be sought that the use of blue dye during the weed spraying was continuing and no spraying had been undertaken by the Council without this being added.

M King, Highways Area Manager provided an update, a full version of which would be shared with Members following the meeting.  He advised that any delays were due to the service still having difficulty in recruiting suitably qualified staff.

In response to a query if Members would receive training on accessing data from the new “Fix my Street” application, it was thought that Area Managers would be able to provide information to Members and that the system would advise if any works were required and when a job had been completed.  It was thought that a briefing was to be provided to Members, however it was mainly a reporting tool for use by the public allowing them to report issues quickly and easily with a facility to upload photographs.

A report of a problem with street lights at Prestwick Road Ends would be passed to the relevant section.  In relation to street furniture on the C403 it was clarified that there was a slight issue regarding the procurement of materials.  The issue of lines on the roundabout approaching the A69 would be raised with D Laux. 

The next meeting will be held on Monday 12 June 2023 (subject to the diary of meetings being agreed at Annual Council on 17 May) and will be Planning only.

The meeting of the Local Area Council was scheduled for 4.00 pm on Monday 12 June 2023, subject to the Diary of Meetings being agreed by Annual Council on 17 May.