Agenda and draft minutes

Councillor Dunn, Vice-Chair (Planning) outlined the procedure which would be followed at the virtual meeting and of the changes to the public speaking protocol.

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Armstrong, Jones and Towns.

Minutes of the meeting of the Castle Morpeth Local Area Council held on Monday 8 March 2021 as circulated, to be confirmed as a true record and signed by the Chair.

RESOLVED that the minutes of the meeting held of the Castle Morpeth Local Area Council held on Monday 8 March 2021, as circulated, be confirmed as a true record and signed by the Chair.

Unless already entered in the Council’s Register of Members’ interests, members are required to disclose any personal interest (which includes any disclosable pecuniary interest) they may have in any of the items included on the agenda for the meeting in accordance with the Code of Conduct adopted by the Council on 4 July 2012, and are reminded that if they have any personal interests of a prejudicial nature (as defined under paragraph 17 of the Code Conduct) they must not participate in any discussion or vote on the matter and must leave the room. NB Any member needing clarification must contact the monitoring officer by email at monitoringofficer@northumberland.gov.uk. Please refer to the guidance on disclosures at the rear of this agenda letter.

Councillor Foster advised that she would be speaking as local member on behalf of residents on application 20/01768/FUL and would therefore withdraw from the meeting once she had spoken and take no part in the determination of that application.

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 no longer 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.  

RESOLVED that the information be noted. 

Proposal to demolish a later addition garage and build a greater quality replacement

Espley Hall, Espley, Morpeth, Northumberland, NE61 3DJ

Proposal to demolish a later addition garage and build a greater quality replacement 

Espley Hall, Espley, Morpeth, Northumberland, NE61 3DJ

There were no questions in relation to the site visit videos which had been circulated in advance of the meeting.

The application was introduced by J Murphy, Planning Area Manager - Development Management, with the aid of a power point presentation.  She advised that there was an error in paragraph 7.18 of the officer’s report and the third last sentence should read … it was considered that, on balance, there would not be sufficient grounds to refuse the application ….

A written statement in objection to the application from Russell Emmerson was read out to the Committee by G Horsman, Principal Planning Officer.  A copy of the statement would be filed with the signed minutes of the meeting and would be uploaded to the Council’s website.

A written statement in support of the application from Michael Hepburn, Lichfields, was read out to the Committee by R Soulsby, Planning Officer.   A copy of the statement would be filed with the signed minutes of the meeting and would be uploaded to the Council’s website.

Councillor Dickinson joined the meeting at 4:16pm after the Officer’s presentation on the application it was confirmed that he would take no part in the deciding of this application.

The Planning Area Manager provided clarification on the full dimensions of the proposed development.  The Director of Planning advised that this was a Green Belt site and therefore any development needed to satisfy the legal test of very special circumstances and that Members should look at the application in these terms rather than as a balancing of harm versus benefit. 

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

·       The application had been assessed as a stand-alone building under paragraph 145 of the NPPF which stated that the replacement of a building should not be materially larger than the one it replaced.  The applicant was asking for it to be considered from the permitted development perspective and how much bigger the new building would be from the permitted development, however Officers had assessed it on the existing garage.

·       Whilst it was welcomed that the applicant had wished to improve the design over the permitted development, the Director of Planning advised caution as there could be differing options under permitted development rights and not just what had been shown from the applicant. 

·       Paragraph 79 of the NPPF which allowed support for schemes of exceptional architectural design must also significantly enhance its immediate setting, and be sensitive to the defining characteristics of the local area.  The proposed development did not meet this criterion.

Councillor Dodd proposed acceptance of the recommendation to refuse the application as outlined in the officer report, which was seconded by Councillor Foster. A vote was taken and it was unanimously

RESOLVED that the application be REFUSED for the following reason:

1.    The proposed garage by virtue of its scale and massing was  ...  view the full minutes text for item 222.

Change of use: vehicle depot to material recycling facility (B2 Use Classes)

Watsons Yard, Barrington Road, Bedlington, Northumberland NE22 7AH

Change of use: vehicle depot to material recycling facility (B2 Use Classes) 

Watsons Yard, Barrington Road, Bedlington, Northumberland 

NE22 7AH 

R Soulsby, Planning Officer provided an introduction to the application with the aid of a power point presentation.  He advised that one further objection had been received since the report had been published which stated “I strongly object to this planning application due to increased noise, pollution and heavy traffic in the local area”

A written statement in objection to the application from residents was read out to the Committee by G Horsman, Principal Planning Officer.  A copy of the statement would be filed with the signed minutes of the meeting and would be uploaded to the Council’s website.

Councillor Foster, as the local Ward Member read out a statement in relation to the application.  A copy of the statement would be filed with the signed minutes of the meeting and would be uploaded to the Council’s website.

A written statement in support of the application from the Agent, K Wood, was read out to the Committee by L Little, Senior Democratic Services Officer. A copy of the statement would be filed with the signed minutes of the meeting and would be uploaded to the Council’s website.

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

·       Waste management facilities were an acceptable use on industrial and commercial estates with the proviso that they were modern and well managed operations.  Robust planning conditions would control noise from the operation and in addition the day to day activities of the site would be covered by dual controls with the Environment Agency under their permit which would set out how the Company would manage noise/dust etc.  The activities which created the most dust would take place inside with dampening down of materials outside.  The Environment Agency would undertake checks as part of the permit.  Therefore there would be a range of controls over the side and what had been presented fell within what was felt to be acceptable in terms of adverse impact.  Members were asked to consider that this was an industrial estate with a wide range of uses which could cause dust/noise and that as this site would have more controls the Director of Planning was satisfied that there would be sufficient controls in place.

·       The nearby housing had been in existence for an extensive period of time within the existing settlement of Bedlington Station and was not new housing built next to an industrial estate.  The site was allocated for employment uses with policies not requiring additional controls on the type of activities to be undertaken and there was a range of activities taking place with the site also adjacent to a railway line.

·       A condition which would limit noise measured at noise sensitive properties provided that background noise was at no more than 5 decibels.  The conditions would ensure that the site was managed under current best practice. The Environment Agency required management of the site  ...  view the full minutes text for item 223.

Proposed residential development of four dwellings (as amended 21.12.2020)

Land South Of Centurion Way , Centurion Way, Heddon-On-The-Wall, NE15 0BY

Proposed residential development of four dwellings (as amended 21.12.2020) 

Land South Of Centurion Way , Centurion Way, Heddon-On-The-Wall, NE15 0BY

There were no questions related to the site visit videos previously circulated.

R Laughton, Senior Planning Officer introduced the application to the Committee with the aid of a power point presentation. An update was provided as follows:-

·       The Highways Team had requested that condition 6 be removed and replaced with a condition for the applicant to provide further details on parking to ensure that cars could manoeuvre safely within the site as follows:-

“The development shall not commence until details of the car parking area has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority and implemented in accordance with the approved details. Thereafter the car parking area shall be retained in accordance with the approved details.”

A statement in objection to the application from Mrs L Twizell was read out to the Committee by L Little, Senior Democratic Services Officer.  A copy would be filed with the signed minutes and be uploaded to the Council’s website.

A statement in support of the application on behalf of the applicant was read out to the Committee by R Soulsby, Planning Officer. A copy would be filed with the signed minutes and be uploaded to the Council’s website.

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

·       The site was within the settlement boundary and it was identified in the new Local Plan as a settlement village and it was assumed this site would be anticipated to come forward for housing during the plan period. The new Local Plan was not yet fully adopted and therefore to attach full development plan status it was safer to rely on the existing Local Plan.

·       There had been previous applications for the site from a number of years ago and some information was not available. There had also been proposals for 2 dwellings further down the site, but these applications had been assessed on different planning policies which were in place at that time.

·       The principle of residential development on this site was that subject to an appropriate design this was acceptable.  The merits of this scheme should not be measured against other schemes. This scheme was a reaction to modern design and policies in the NPPF, in response to the current market and was of a high end design quality.

·       In certain locations design cues would be taken from existing buildings, however as there was no over-riding design in the area that was not appropriate in this instance.  These design of these houses was in response to height restrictions on the site in terms of scale and massing.  Members must ask themselves if the response was so insufficient that the harm caused by the proposals outweighed the benefit of delivering housing on a site identified for housing in the Local Plan.  The Director of Planning suggested that the application was in response to design cues to the built form  ...  view the full minutes text for item 224.

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.