Agenda item

Replace Existing Building (3no Flats/14 No Bed Sits Space) With 3no Detached Houses With 18 Bed Spaces. On The Beach, Harbour Road, Beadnell, NE67 5AN

 Replace Existing Building (3no Flats/14 No Bed Sits Space) With 3no Detached Houses With 18 Bed Spaces.

On The Beach, Harbour Road, Beadnell, NE67 5AN

D Love – Senior Planning Officer introduced the application with the aid of a PowerPoint presentation and gave members the following updates:

·       An addendum report had been circulated to members prior to the meeting which provided details of the consultee response from Highways.

·       There had been a late comment from Beadnell Parish Council questioning the consultation process with Highways, a response from Highways was provided and read: “When approaching from the north there are essentially two ways you can get into Beadnell, one of which is the road in question.

From a highway safety perspective, on approach to where the development perspective is located when you are coming from the north, drivers have good visibility of the cluster of buildings, with the development in question one of the first ones you can see. The speed limit signage is also clearly visible where it changes to 30mph meaning vehicles should not be getting up to high speeds.

There is already an existing access and existing access(es) to the cluster of buildings on this road where vehicles currently manoeuvre out onto the highway and no record of road safety incidents in the last 5 years and so there is no evidence that would suggest there would be an unacceptable impact on highway safety in this instance.”

·       Members had received direct communication from Beadnell Parish Council prior to the meeting questioning the description of the development by the case officer in terms of unit numbers and accommodation capacity and the description of the access road to the site by the case officer and the highways comments in relation to turning and parking. D. Love confirmed that they had queried the description with the applicant, the offering was advertised as 14, but the potential was there without planning permission for 18.

·       D Love confirmed to members that the existing unit was not residential. As per the use classes order, it was a sui generis use and not residential C3. For the purposes of the assessment, it was a commercial operation.

G. Martindale spoke on behalf of Beadnell Parish Council and gave members the following information:

·       The current building did not present an attractive entrance to the village and the Parish Council were generally supportive of the intention to demolish and replace it.

·       This was an overdevelopment of the site, with one building replaced by three.

·       The height and uniformity of the buildings did not respond to local character within the Beadnell Conservation area in which the site was situated.

·       The site was boarded by the main road into and out of Beadnell to the North. The Parish Council were concerned that the reduction in parking provision from 25% to 15% of the site area would result in cars backing onto the highway and across a well-used pedestrian path.

·       Parking was a major concern in all areas with high concentrations of Holiday-lets. Policy 8 of the north Northumberland Coast Neighbourhood Plan sought to ensure sufficient car parking space was provided within the curtilage of the proposed development to ensure no additional on-street parking on nearby streets. The application contravened that policy due to the over-development of the site.

·       The AONB stated that new defences were required to protect the site. The Local Flood Authority did not agree but asked for a £10,000 contribution towards coastal erosion defence works.

·       The Parish Council objected to the application but would be open to considering a smaller development in keeping with the size of the site.

N Allan spoke in support of the application and gave members the following information:

·       The application site as it stood was not attractive and was an eyesore.

·       There were no technical objections.

·       New sea defences were not part of the proposal.

·       The main issue was the impact on local character.

·       The height of the application would be the same as neighbouring properties.

·       Beadnell had a mixed character of buildings, traditional and modern.

·       The application would bring quality design and uniformity to the entrance of the village and was the best scheme for the site.

·       The application was adjacent to a conservation area.

Following the public speakers, members were invited to ask questions of the planning officer. The following information was then provided:

·       The design was acceptable in the planning balance and the planning officer did not think the application was an overdevelopment of the site.

·       The proposal allowed for two parking spaces per unit.

·       The lifetime of the development would be at least 100 years.

·       There were conflicting views on whether the application site was in the conservation area.

Councillor Castle proposed to defer the application to allow officers to clarify whether the application site was in the Beadnell Conservation Area and for a conservation officer and highways officer to attend. This was seconded by Councillor Hardy.

A vote was taken, and it was unanimously

RESOLVED that the application be DEFERRED to allow planning officers to clarify whether the application site was in the Beadnell Conservation area and to ensure a conservation officer and highways officer to attend the meeting when the application was next discussed.