Agenda and draft minutes

Apologies for absence were received from Councillor Dale.

Minutes of the meeting of the Tynedale Local Area Council held on 9 November 2021, as circulated, to be confirmed as a true record and signed by the Chair.

RESOLVED that the minutes of the meeting of Tynedale Local Area Council, held on 9 November 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 Legal Services, monitoringofficer@northumberland.gov.uk.  Please refer to the guidance on disclosures at the rear of this agenda letter.

Councillor Oliver declared a personal and non-prejudicial interest in planning application 21/03104/FUL as he knew the applicants.

Councillor Cessford then vacated the Chair, for Planning Vice-Chair Councillor Scott to chair the development control section of the agenda, as was the arrangement for all Local Area Councils.

The Chair advised members of the procedure which would be followed at the meeting.

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 committee was requested 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.

Construction of a first floor rear garden room extension with balcony and external staircase

Saxby House, Station Road, Corbridge, NE45 5AY

The Development Management Area Manager (West) introduced the application with the aid of a powerpoint presentation and advised that there were no updates following publication of the report.

Mrs. M. Williams, the applicant, spoke in support of the application and made the following comments:-

·        They wished to address 3 points:

-       The reason for their application.

-       Disproportionate development.

-       Unsympathetic design and scale.

·        They had suffered from severe flooding twice in 10 years.  In 2005, following which £1.2 million was spent on flood defences but they were flooded again following Storm Desmond in December 2015.  It had been devastating with the contents of the ground floor being contaminated and thrown into skips.  Mud was on every surface, doors couldn’t be opened due to being warped and twisted flooring, soft furnishings soaked, and photographs, pictures and memorabilia were irreplaceable.

·        The level of trauma was directly related to the level of the flood.  In 2005 the water had been 1 metre high.  In 2015 it had been 1.6 metres, higher than the applicant.

·        The bad experience had been extended by the amount of restitution and restoration required.

·        There had been endless meetings with contents and buildings insurers, assessors, surveyors, builders, auditors, project managers, window specialists whilst finding another home, look after the family, holding down a job and hold the community together.

·        The demands of rebuilding would be easier if they could live upstairs as the first floor would be habitable.

·        The application would give them first floor access and a room to live in during the day, which was not a bedroom.

·        It would future proof the house and enable them to return as soon as critical services were back, usually after 2 weeks.

·        Disproportionate development and special circumstances had been established in 2016 when a nearby neighbour at Yoton had been permitted to extend by over 100% and lifting their house 2.6 metres to enable them to live above the flood line.  Extracts from the Planning Officer’s report for that application stated:

‘If measures (like this) aren’t taken to safeguard local properties the community remains disbanded and susceptible to future flooding impact.’

‘…It is clear that in applying a flexible approach to dealing with applications of this nature in flood-hit communities, that the social, environmental and economic aspects of the NPPF can be achieved.  The alternative, is to leave a local community vulnerable to the risks of flooding and impose financial and social burdens upon the society.  On balance, very special circumstances are considered to exist which would outweigh the harm identified to the Green Belt by reason of inappropriateness and by its impact upon the openness of the Green Belt….’

·        Whilst they lived in the same area with the same conditions, the planning officer’s report ‘…hoped that following significant prevention works having been undertaken in the area, that the property would not be affected in the same way again.’  The £1.2 million flood defences built after the floods in 2005 had not prevented a more devastating flooding less  ...  view the full minutes text for item 67.

A single presentation was given for agenda items 21/02499/ADE, 21/02500/ADE and 21/02501/ADE, however individual decisions were taken on each item at the conclusion of the debate.

Advertisement Consent: Installation of 4 No. fascia signs, 3 No. booth lettering signs and 1 No. 15" digital booth screen (as amended)

Land at North East of Bishops Garage Building, Alemouth Road, Hexham, NE46 3PJ

The Development Management Area Manager (West) introduced the report with the aid of a powerpoint presentation and advised that there were no updates following publication of the report for agenda items 6 (21/02499/ADE) and 8 (21/02501/ADE).  The following revised condition 2 was recommended for agenda item 7 (21/02500/ADE) as the totem sign had been reduced by a further 0.5 metre:

‘The development hereby permitted shall not be carried out otherwise in complete accordance with the approved plans.  The approved plans for this development are:

6636_AEW_8455_0401 Rev B (07/12/2021) - Block Plan (Signage Application 2)

Drive Totem 1 : 4.5 meter - Sign Type 1A (Issue / Rev 4 - 19/02/2019)

Reason: To ensure that the approved development is carried out in complete accordance with the approved plans.

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

·        The booth signs adjacent to windows were positioned at different heights depending on their purpose.  The measurements in paragraph 2.30 on page 20 of the agenda indicated the height of the sign and not the size of the lettering.

·        Whilst it was noted that Hexham Town Council had objected on the grounds that the applications were not in line with principles outlined in the Neighbourhood Plan (policies HNP2, 3, 4 and 5), only amenity and public safety could be assessed as part of an advertisement application.  The amenity of the immediate areas and looking towards the Conservation Area had been assessed and advice sought from the Council’s Design & Built Heritage Officers who were satisfied with the revised applications.

·        Officers had discussed the proposals with the applicant in order to reduce the proliferation of signs and also their size and remove any felt to be unnecessary, those proposed on elevation A.  The remaining signs were considered to be acceptable on the application site, the wider bunker site and on the townscape itself.

·        It was confirmed that it did not matter what a sign said or who it was for, the relevant issue was its appearance.

·        The advertising signs within these applications were for locations within the site and not on the main road.  The totem sign, in the corner of the car park, would be the tallest sign, and would not be higher than the building.  It was expected that a separate application would be made for a sign on the main road.

Councillor Horncastle proposed acceptance of the officer’s recommendation that permission be granted.  This was seconded by Councillor Sharp and unanimously agreed.

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

Advertisement consent for 1no. 4.5 metre high totem sign (as amended)

Land at North East of Bishops Garage Building, Alemouth Road, Hexham, NE46 3PJ

Councillor Oliver proposed acceptance of the officer’s recommendation that permission be granted, subject to the revisions to condition 2.  This was seconded by Councillor Riddle and unanimously agreed.

RESOLVED that the application be GRANTED permission for the reasons and with the conditions as outlined in the report and the following revised condition 2:

‘The development hereby permitted shall not be carried out otherwise in complete accordance with the approved plans.  The approved plans for this development are:

6636_AEW_8455_0401 Rev B (07/12/2021) - Block Plan (Signage Application 2)

Drive Totem 1: 4.5 meter - Sign Type 1A (Issue / Rev 4 - 19/02/2019)

Reason: To ensure that the approved development is carried out in complete accordance with the approved plans.’

Advertisement consent for 4 no. freestanding signs and 14 no. Dot signs (as amended)

Land at North East of Bishops Garage Building, Alemouth Road, Hexham, NE46 3PJ

Councillor Hutchinson proposed acceptance of the officer’s recommendation that permission be granted.  This was seconded by Councillor Stewart and unanimously agreed.

RESOLVED that the application be GRANTED permission 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.

The report provided information on the progress of planning appeals.

RESOLVED that the information be noted.

On the conclusion of the above items, Councillor Scott vacated the Chair.  Councillor Cessford returned to the Chair and continued the meeting.

The next meeting will be held on Tuesday, 11 January 2022 at 4.00 p.m.

The next meeting would be held on Tuesday 11 January 2022 at 4.00 p.m.

The Chair Informed members that North East Ambulance Service would be in attendance at the meeting of the Health and Well-Being OSC on 5 April 2022.