Agenda and draft minutes

The committee is asked to note the following membership and terms of reference for the Castle Morpeth Local Area Council which were agreed by Council on 17 May 2023. 

The membership is made up of the county councillors who represent the 13 electoral divisions in the Castle Morpeth area: 

Chair : J Beynon

Vice Chair: D Towns; Vice Chair (Planning): JD Foster 

Quorum - 4 

Terms of reference

(1)       To enhance good governance in the area and ensure that the

Council’s policies take account of the needs and aspirations of local communities and do not discriminate unfairly between the different Areas.

(2)       To advise the Cabinet on budget priorities and expenditure within the

Area.

(3)      To consider, develop and influence policy and strategy development of

the Council, its arms-length organisations, and other relevant bodies, to ensure that they meet local requirements and facilitate efficient and transparent decision making.  

(4)     To receive information, consider and comment on matters associated

with service delivery including those undertaken in partnership agencies, affecting the local area to ensure that they meet local requirements, including matters relating to community safety, anti- social behaviour and environmental crime.

(5)     To consider and refer to Cabinet any issues from a local community

perspective with emerging Neighbourhood Plans within their area, and consider local planning applications as per the planning delegation scheme

(6)      To consider and recommend adjustments to budget priorities in

relation to Local Transport Plan issues within their area, and to make decisions in relation to devolved capital highway maintenance allocations.

(7)     To engage, through the appropriate networks, with all key stakeholders

from the public, private, voluntary and community sectors to facilitate the delivery of area priorities. This will include undertaking regular liaison with parish and town councils.

(8)     To inform, consult and engage local communities in accordance

with Council policy and guidance, through the appropriate networks. 

(9)      To, as appropriate, respond or refer with recommendations to

local petitions and councillor calls for action.

(10)    To make certain appointments to outside bodies as agreed by Council.

(11)    To determine applications for grant aid from the Community Chest, either through Panels for individual Local Area Councils, or through the Panel of Local Area Council Chairs for countywide applications.

(12)    To refer and receive appropriate issues for consideration to or from

other Council Committees, and as appropriate invite Portfolio Holders to attend a meeting if an item in their area of responsibility is to be discussed.

RESOLVED that the Membership and Terms of Reference for the Castle Morpeth Local Area Committee as agreed by Council at the meeting on 17 May 2023 be noted.

Councillor J Foster, Vice-Chair Planning in the Chair advised of the procedure to be followed during the planning part of the meeting.   It was confirmed that Members have viewed the site visit videos in advance of the meeting.

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Bawn, Dunn and Jones.

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.

Erection of 2x detached two bed bungalows

56 Station Road, Stannington, Northumberland, NE61 6NH

Erection of 2x detached two bed bungalows

56 Station Road, Stannington, Northumberland, NE61 6NH

An introduction to the report was provided by R Soulsby with the aid of a power point presentation. 

Councillor Tolson addressed the Committee speaking on behalf of Stannington Parish Council (SPC) in objection to the Committee.  His comments included the following:-

·       Objective 5 of the Stannington Neighbourhood Plan (SNP) was to ensure each settlement in the Plan area maintained its identify with a recognition in the Plan of the differences between the settlements and the need to reflect local character in design.   This remained the true representation of SPC and residents.

·       Policy 10, design and character development proposals would be expected, where relevant, to demonstrate how they would respect the context of the site and its surroundings, rural character, historic setting and context.

·       The proposed development was a continued and unwelcome urbanisation of the settlement.

·       SNP also stated that Stannington Station had a different character to Stannington Village. It had open views across to the countryside and these were very important to people in the area to retain the agricultural feel of the settlement. The rural context was a very important factor to consider in any future development proposals with Stannington Station within the Green Belt.

·       Whilst the development was within the inset boundary it would block open views of the countryside and whilst not directly in the Green Belt impinges upon it and was considered harmful.

·       The current sewerage system was failing and was not acceptable however it was recognised that the applicant does address and mitigate this.

·       Stannington Station was fast becoming a village and if development continued local facilities and services would not be able to sustain the growth.

·       Policies QOP1 and QOP2 of the Northumberland Local Plan in relation to design principles and good design and amenity had not been applied. 

·       Development had been supported in the past however further development would spoil the rurality of the area and this had not been taken into account.

L Coleman, applicant, addressed the Committee speaking in support of the application.  Her comments included the following:-

·       The application was for a private development to build a bungalow for herself and her husband and a second bungalow for her daughter and family and was not a commercial venture.

·       The majority of objections were from people who were new to the area and were themselves living in recent new build properties on Station Road.

·       There were issues with the drainage and sewage infrastructure on the road however their land had already in place a sustainable drainage system which meant that all of their sewage, household and storm water went into a treatment plant with the clean water fed into a well-established wildlife pond and then gradually fed into the burn at the south of their land.  This was completely separate from the main sewerage system and would service the new bungalows.

·       The recent SNP was consulted on and agreed by residents. An inset boundary line was drawn  ...  view the full minutes text for item 5.

Proposal for widening and surfacing of access track

Land East Of The Retreat, Cresswell, Northumberland

Proposal for widening and surfacing of access track

Land East Of The Retreat, Cresswell, Northumberland

An introduction to the report was provided by R Soulsby, Senior Planning Officer with the aid of a power point presentation.

Councillor D Laing, addressed the Committee speaking on behalf of Cresswell Parish Council (CPC).  His comments included the following information:-

·       The application was for the widening of the 18^th Century carriageway previously used by the Hall and now used as a footpath for residents and holiday makers. There was no need for it to be upgraded for use by HGVs unless there was an alternative motive i.e. to get caravans on the area.

·       He emphasised that residents were against this development with in excess of 100 people saying no to it and asked Members to look at it again.

·       The application purported to be to allow improved vehicular access for emergency vehicles to the Pele Tower, this was not needed as they would access it by the Village Green and not the caravan site.

·       CPC did not understand why Park Resorts would wish to carry this work out unless there was an ulterior motive. 

·       The trees shielded the caravans from the village and formed a natural barriers and there was no reason for HGVs to access this area.

J Bailey addressed the Committee speaking in support of the application on behalf of the applicant.  His comments included the following:-

·       The proposal was to widen the carriageway from 1.7m to 3.7m utilising a new system which would match the existing and retain the woodland.

·       No lighting would be provided, no caravans were to be sited and no trees felled in order for the track to be widened. The Woodland Arborist had recommended some trees for removal for good management of the area.

·       In relation to the heritage impact on the boundary wall and the Pele Tower, the character of the area would remain and Historic England had no objection.  The Building Conservation Officer had advised that there would be less than substantial harm and the biodiversity of the site would be improved as the woodland was in poor condition and lacked diversity.

·       The additional planting to provide additional screening and woodland management plan would add biodiversity and ensure that the woodland was maintained and protected for 30 years should the application be approved.

In response to questions from Members of the Committee the following information was provided:-

·       The application was for the widening of an existing track from 1.7m to 3.7m. Officers did not look at why the track was required and there was no accompanying information.  A comprehensive woodland management plan was conditioned as part of the proposed recommendation and the site would be protected by this Plan.  If a future application was received for the site then the woodland management plan would be a material consideration and appropriate weight would be given to it.  The application before Members at this time was only to widen a track and protect woodland.

·       If a  ...  view the full minutes text for item 6.

Change of use of land adjacent to N1 Golf Centre for up to 20No plots to be used for the siting of accommodation (micro holiday cabins) in association with the existing business.

Morpeth Archers Site, Tranwell Woods, Morpeth, Northumberland

NE61 6AQ

Change of use of land adjacent to N1 Golf Centre for up to 20No plots to be used for the siting of accommodation (micro holiday cabins) in association with the existing business.

Morpeth Archers Site, Tranwell Woods, Morpeth, Northumberland

NE61 6AQ

R Laughton, Senior Planning Officer provided an introduction to the report with the aid of a power point presentation.  Late representations had been received and the following summary was provided:-

·            Objectors were still disappointed that amenity and ecology issues had not been added as refusal reasons;  

·            The submitted petition had 75 signatures, not 63; 

·            Morpeth Town Council had submitted an objection to the scheme stating the application was contrary to NLP Policy ENC 15d as the pods were not temporary structures; there should be equal weight given to the polices in the Morpeth Neighbourhood Plan and Policy Set1; there was no evidence for demand for such a development; and there were Human Rights Implications as the scheme would interfere with an individual’s enjoyment of their property.  

·            The agent had submitted a representation in which it was highlighted that this was not the originally chosen site with the preferred location nearer the entrance of N1 Golf. The current application resulted from discussions with the Council. There was a delicate balancing act regarding the impact to the Green Belt and the economic and business benefits. The applicant would be willing to undertake the necessary surface and foul water drainage assessments if members were willing to support the application. 

S Geoghegan addressed the Committee speaking in objection to the application on behalf of 37 households and highlighting the 75 signature petition.  Her comments included the following:-

·       The applicant had for over 9 months failed to mention residents in the application, engage with the local community or provide requested documents to the Planning Officers. 

·       Residents encased the application site on the southern and eastern boundary where the site could be openly seen for 7 months of the year. It was a uniquely peaceful private area of 45 houses, had incredible biodiversity, was within the Green Belt surrounded by 3 separate old plantations which were protected under a blanket TPO.  There were open boundaries to allow for the free movement of wildlife across properties assisting the wildlife corridor entering from Tranwell Woods local wildlife site and into the applicant’s land.

·       The ecologist had done numerous ecology and bat reports and identified the presence of priority and protected species and advised that the proposals would effectively disconnect the wildlife corridor and that even with mitigation there could be no justification for the development. 

·       There was now an ecology crisis point in Tranwell Woods.  Saltwick Plantation was now used as a dog walking route by the residents of St Mary’s causing the wildlife to leave and go into Gubeon Plantation adjacent to the application site.  This was the site for the applicant’s previous application which residents also objected to.  It would have destroyed the plantation and ecology in and around it and as an HPI was  ...  view the full minutes text for item 7.

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. 

RESOLVED that the information be noted.