Agenda and draft minutes

Apologies were received from Councillors Flux, Foster, Renner-Thompson and Wallace.

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.

Councillor Ball advised that she had attended consultation events and heard from residents in connection with application 24/03112/CCD, however she still had an open mind and would take part in the determination of the 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 not circulated with the agenda but are available on the Council’s website at  http://www.northumberland.gov.uk/Planning.aspx

The report outlined the procedure to be followed and 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.

Outline permission (all matters reserved) for demolition of existing buildings and walling, and subsequent erection of up to 200no. dwellings (including extra care provision) and associated works

Former Hexham Middle School Site, Wanless Lane, Hexham, Northumberland, NE46 1BU

Outline permission (all matters reserved) for demolition of existing buildings and walling, and subsequent erection of up to 200no. dwellings (including extra care provision) and associated works

Former Hexham Middle School Site, Wanless Lane, Hexham, Northumberland, NE46 1BU

R Campbell, Principal Planning Officer provided an introduction to the report with the aid of a power point presentation.  Updates were provided as follows:-

·       A further objection had been received, taking the total number of objections received to 7.  It stated that on the face of it, it seemed a shame to demolish a handsome listed building, part of Hexham's heritage. A was a pity the main building could not be preserved in the overall scheme to build much needed housing, and it was hoped the houses would include council owned properties for rent as well as affordable homes for purchase.

For clarity it was explained that it was only the four non listed school buildings which were to be demolished, and the listed buildings were currently excluded from this application.

·       In relation to biodiversity net gain, Ecology had recommended that a habitat monitoring fee of £4,664 would be required and this would be secured through a S106 agreement, therefore Condition 40 should be reworded to include reference to the monitoring fee and also to remove reference to at reserved matters stage following further advice from the Council’s Legal team and should now read:

“No development shall commence until all those with an interest in the land comprising the development hereby permitted have entered into planning obligations with the local planning authority under section 106 of the town and Country Planning act 1990. The obligations shall require affordable housing to be provided, and the payment of financial contributions towards a habitat monitoring fee, open space, education and healthcare obligations, to be calculated in accordance with Appendices D and H and Policies HOU 6, INF 1, INF 5 and  INF 6 of the Northumberland Local Plan.

Reason: To ensure the appropriate planning obligations are secured for the development, in accordance with Appendices D and H, and Policies HOU 6, INF 1, INF 5 and INF 6 of the Northumberland Local Plan.

W Breach addressed the Committee speaking in objection to the application on behalf of the Hexham Civic Society.  Her comments included the following:-

·       Hexham Civic Society (HCS) whilst supporting the site being brought back into use, objected, alongside the Built Heritage and Design Team, Historic England, Hexham Town Council and the Northumberland and Newcastle Society to the current outline planning application which it was believed should be deferred pending resolution of several issues.

·       They found it extraordinary that NCC should submit an application for outline planning permission within a Conservation Area and that by doing so were contravening their own policies.

·       If the outline application was accepted there were threats to the Conservation Area, the listed buildings and other heritage assets. The scheme proposed demolition of the 1931 Beamont Building and the boundary wall, with no scheme for their replacement.

·       The Northumberland  ...  view the full minutes text for item 57.

Proposed development of community and youth facility including performance and event space, training facilities, office space, community services, cafe and associated access, drainage, landscaping and public realm improvements.

Wansbeck Square, Station Road, Ashington, Northumberland

Proposed development of community and youth facility including performance and event space, training facilities, office space, community services, cafe and associated access, drainage, landscaping and public realm improvements.

Wansbeck Square, Station Road, Ashington, Northumberland

An introduction to the report was provided by R Soulsby, Senior Planning Officer, with the aid of a power point presentation.  The Committee were advised that there was a

slight amendment to the wording of condition 27 recommended by the Highways Development Team and it should now read: 

“The proposed development shall be serviced by delivery, servicing and refuse vehicles within the approved Service Yard only by rigid vehicles and no articulated vehicles shall seek to service the development from the Highway, adjacent Ashington Station Car Park or approved Service Yard.

“Reason: In the interests of highway safety in adherence to the submitted details in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework and Policies TRA 1 and TRA 2 of the Northumberland Local Plan.”

A McGregor addressed the Committee speaking in objection to the Committee.  His comments included the following:

·       Whilst he was certain that the application would be approved, he was critical of some aspects of it and that while he had been classed as an objector in terms of public speaking, he considered he was more of a critical friend and would suggest how the application could be improved.

·       The main theme was that the scheme was too narrowly defined and there was not enough joined up thinking about the whole town view of the development.  The site actually excluded some of the images that had been shown on the presentation, the current café, pizza shop and former bank building and at the other end the Post Office, a sale room and Station Villa.  This did not provide the best use of this key town centre site. It would provide a messy mix of old and new and the possibility of the old bridge over the railway needing work doing to it should be considered now.

·       He understood the difficulties around the ownership of the sites and mission creep, however more consideration should be given to a more ambitious scheme to achieve the very best option for the town centre, rather than a scheme which in a few years’ time would be questioned as why didn’t they, or why did they do that?

·       Demolition of the existing Wansbeck Square had commenced, and Government funding had been secured on the basis of the present proposals, so it was probably too late to make any changes to the scheme.

·       The loss of the road that was under the present building would complicate traffic flow and there seemed to be no joined up thinking on how vehicles would enter and exit the newly extended car park.

·       Using more land would allow vehicles to better connect with Station Road. Also better links with pedestrian and cycleways and to ensure the feeder bus service to coordinate with the trains. He accepted the need to improve the gateway to Ashington  ...  view the full minutes text for item 58.

Erection of 100 no. 2, 3 and 4 bedroom two-storey dwellings, demolition of existing buildings and associated infrastructure (amended 08/10/24),

Land Surrounding Spital House Farm, North Seaton Road, Newbiggin-By-The-Sea, Northumberland

Erection of 100 no. 2, 3 and 4 bedroom two-storey dwellings, demolition of existing buildings and associated infrastructure (amended 08/10/24),

Land Surrounding Spital House Farm, North Seaton Road, Newbiggin-By-The-Sea, Northumberland

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

·       One further objection had been received which stated  “The land that Miss Scott proposes to build on is prone to flooding due to mine workings in the area as the underground pumps were turned off after the last mine in the area closed the disused road that the A189 spine road was built alongside the disused road and housing was built along this Road. I for one would never buy a property that was built on flooded land or land prone to flooding there's no infrastructure for the extra traffic in this area that would be created by this build what is happening with the old colliery school site that was demolished for housing by arch years ago why not build on there or what about the old colliery workings behind the former colliery school site.”

·       A slight rewording to condition 9 was proposed following comments from the local Authority’s Ecologist. This should now read:

“Works on site will be undertaken in accordance with the barn owl mitigation measures included in the report Spital House Farm, Newbiggin-By-The-Sea Northern Parcel Ornithological Assessment v1.3 (Biodiverse Consulting, September 2024) including:

·       Demolition of Building 7 will not be permitted from March to December inclusive unless a suitably qualified ecologist has first confirmed that no nesting birds are present (within 48 hours of commencement of demolition)  

·       A pre-construction nest check of Building 7 will be carried prior to demolition. 

·       The check will take place no more than 48 hours before the commencement of works.

·        If a Barn Owl nest is identified, consultation with ECOW will be required to determine next steps, which will be agreed with the LPA in writing prior to recommencement of works to this building. “

·       Rewording of condition 14 was proposed to reflect additional ground gas information provided by the applicant following publication of the committee report and should now read :

“No building shall be brought into use or occupied until the applicant has submitted a verification report to the methodology detailed in the Ground Gas Protection Verification Plan (Revision A) by Sirius Geotechnical Ltd,  9617B/10355/AEC/APC, 7th December 2023. The verification report shall be approved in writing by the LPA. 

Reason:  In order to prevent any accumulation of ground gas, which may potentially be prejudicial to the health & amenity in accordance with policy POL 2 of the Northumberland Local Plan and the National Planning Policy Framework.”

This verification plan shall also be added to the approved documents condition for the application (condition 2).

·       The recommendation was also to be updated to include the provision of 10 affordable homes which were also to be secured as part of the S106 agreement.

D Ball, addressed  ...  view the full minutes text for item 59.