item 5 - monthly meetings calendar - march 2018 - durham ...democracy.durham.gov.uk/data/development...

SEDGEFIELD BOROUGH COUNCIL

PLANNING APPLICATIONS - TO BE DETERMINED

______________________________________________________________

1. 7/2005/0424/DM APPLICATION DATE: 20 June 2005 PROPOSAL: ERECTION OF 2NO. 250KW WIND TURBINES LOCATION: HYDRO POLYMERS LTD PRESTON ROAD AYCLIFFE INDUSTRIAL

PARK NEWTON AYCLIFFE DL5 6ED APPLICATION TYPE: Detailed Application APPLICANT: Hydro Polymers Newton Aycliffe Co Durham DL5 6EA CONSULTATIONS 1. GREAT AYCLIFFE TC 2. Cllr. George C. Gray 3. Cllr. M A Dalton 4. Cllr. E M Paylor 5. Helical Properties Ltd 6. BBC 7. Countryside Team 8. FIRE AUTHORITY 9. Network Rail 10. DCC (PROWS) 11. LANDSCAPE ARCH 12. English Partnerships 13. L.PLANS 14. ENV. HEALTH 15. WILDLIFE TRUST 16. RAMBLER 17. NORTHUMBRIAN WATER 18. DCC (TRAFFIC) 19. ECONOMIC DEV 20. OFCOM 21. NATS 22. Teeside Airpor 23. Civil Aviation 24. ENV AGENCY 25. ENGLISH NATURE 26. DARLO BORO 27. DCC (DESIGN) 28. Crown Castle UK Limited 29. John Blake 30. CSS Spectrum Management Services Ltd 31. Joint Radio Company Ltd 32. Ministry of Defence 33. Hutchinson 3G 34. South Durham Healthcare NHS Trust 35. Orange NEIGHBOUR/INDUSTRIAL

Item 5

3



______________________________________________________________

Ariel House, School Aycliffe – 1 – 3 Beaumont Way Primex, Packaging industries, Bradbury Road DDS, HB technologies, Corporate be design, JMD associates, ITEC, Beryl Thompson, Comunications Training, DDA lifts, Aquila business resource, Multi surfaces ltd, Coatham Avenue MT 2000, Naylor drainage, Palram, Tollwood, Linear Cumbie Way Dale Country Foods, Hargreaves, Durham Way South 5,6,7,8,9 Presswork, Thrislington, Digital Factory, The bait box, DL5 6EA Linden, promotional handling, Basic skills agency, Ecotech, Teespak, Charity commission Eldon Road LVR Transport, Treetops, Bobbys foods, Hayton & Lamb Fulbek Road 1 & 1a Gurney Way 1 – 13 & 15 - 23 Hilton Avenue Haldex Horndale Avenue Lucite, Permoid Hurworth Road JD Spooner, 1-14, 16, Langton Business Centre Durham Marble, Langton Medical Training, Brundlewood Upholstery, Hill Woodhouse property, Helical Properties investements, Leaside Linear, Sawmon, Bluebell, Ayfab, Accident repair, 5, 7 - 19 Northfield Way 1 – 22, 24 – 26, 28 – 31, 34, SMK, Hayward, Cooker Plus, TA Centre Oak Leaf School Aycliffe Preston Road Flymo, Electrolux, Redworth Way 2, Ridgeway Argon, Stiller, Camedia, Saunders, Darlington Heat Treatment Heighington Lane Signal box, Locomotion One, Hauser, Dynea, Formica, Upanor, Spring Road DDL Station Road Capita, Perry Process Walworth Road 4 Whinbank Road Fabtech, Eric Smith, Finlay structures, Ultra Bathrooms, Multi Surface, Aycliffe Security, Aclet, no. 22, Trade Interiors, Teesside fluid, Quality hydraulics, Techwax, M&M Gas, SQS Bathrooms, Boston Prospex Whinfield Drive Cash & carry glass, Almit, Webbro, Protec, Bermingham windows, Ringtons, Translube Oils, Aycliffe Minibus, Robinson transport Whitworth Avenue Roman Whitwirth Drive B & H plastics, Tricogen, 5, 7, 11, 17 – 21, 25, 26 Cumby Road 21, 23, 25, 27, 29, 31, 33, 35, 37, 39, 41, 43, 45, 47, 49, Eastfields Road 1a Elmfield Place 1 – 15, 18 – 34, 83 – 89 Linden Place 90 - 106 North Cottages 1 – 22, 10a & 11a School Aycliffe Lane Aycliffe Hall, Old Farm Cottage, Tyne House, Tees House, Wear House South Cottages School Aycliffe 1 - 4 The Garth –1 - 5 Heighington Twin Oaks Farm & stables Watson Road 27, 27a, 33, 35, 41, 43, 47, 49, 51, 53, 55, 57, 59 West cottages, School Aycliffe Eastfields Farm, Dormerstiles The Chestnuts – School Aycliffe Aspen grove – 1 – 11 & 14 - 41 Cherry Tree Drive – 1- 27, 29 – 41 Page 14



______________________________________________________________

Cyprus Grove – 1 – 2, 4 – 5, 7, 9 – 12, 14 – 42 Hawthorn 1 - 40, 42, 44, 46, 48 Jasmine Grove – 1 - 21 Juniper Close 1 - 10, Magnolia Way 1 – 25 Tamarind Close 2-4, 6 – 12, 14 – 15 BOROUGH PLANNING POLICIES IB2 Designation of type of industrial estates IB13 Extension to industrial and business premises T3 Safeguarding Railway Lines D1 General principles for the layout and design of new developments D4 Layout and design of new industrial and business development E14 Safeguarding Plant and Animal Species Protected by Law E21 Development affecting the setting of a listed building _________________________________________________________________________ THE PROPOSAL AND SITE DESCRIPTION Planning consent is sought for the erection of two wind turbines at the Hydro Polymers site on the western edge of the Aycliffe Industrial Estate. It is proposed to erect the turbines within the existing industrial complex. The turbines are specified as having a hub height of between 30 and 35m and a maximum overall tip height of 48m. Consent is being sought for a temporary period of 15 years. Ancillary to the erection of the turbines are the siting of crane pads (used in the erection and decommissioning of the turbines) and the installation of a spur road. It is possible that these will not be required as it is intended to maximise use of the existing infrastructure on the site. Switchgear and metering equipment are intended to be located within existing buildings on the site.

Page 15



______________________________________________________________

There is an assortment of built development already associated with the site as well as those of adjoining sites. There are pockets of woodland to the west along with agricultural land and the settlement of School Aycliffe. The oak leaf sports complex and Town council Offices lies immediately to the north whilst the remainder of the industrial estate lies to the east and south

Page 16



______________________________________________________________

of the site. There is a rail line running immediately to the east of the site, which connects Bishop Auckland, Shildon and Newton Aycliffe with Darlington Station. The turbines are intended to be connected direct to the electricity sub stations, which already exist on the site. Although the overall Hydro Polymers site extends to approximately 160 acres, the footprint of the proposed development is limited to approximately 200sqm (excluding the area oversailed by the turbine rotor). Access to the turbines is via the existing site. A scoping report was submitted to the Local Planning Authority to assess whether an Environmental Impact Assessment would be required. However, taking into account the scale and use of the development, its location and the ancillary information submitted within the Environmental Report it was considered that an Environmental Impact Assessment was not necessary. The turbines proposed for the development would have a combined capacity of 0.5MW, which is indicated by the applicant as being able to provide sufficient electrical energy to meet the domestic requirements of upto 300 households (based on a capacity factor of 30%), or in Hydro Polymers case generate approximately 4% of the plants annual electricity consumption. Based on these calculations it is expected the wind turbines will offset the production of the following greenhouse gasses to the atmosphere;

• 1130 tonnes pf Carbon Dioxide per year; and • 13 tonnes of Sulphur Dioxide per year; and • 4 tonnes of Nitrogen Oxide per year.

PUBLICITY AND CONSULTATION RESPONSES Great Aycliffe Town Council - Raises no objection or observations. Darlington Borough Council – Have requested certain additional information to be provided. Northumbrian Water - Raises no objection or observations. Durham County Highways Officer – Have no highway objections. Durham County Council Rights of Way Officer - Raises no objection. Durham County Fire Authority - Raises no objection Environment Agency – Suggest attaching various conditions to the approval relating to survey and study work to be carried out in view of the site being on a major aquifer within the area. English Nature – Raise no objections although advise several informatives be attached to any approval. Durham County Badger Group – Have indicated the possibility of an outlier Badger sett within the vicinity and suggest that the badger survey is extended to the precise location of the two turbines. Civil Aviation Authority – Have advised that contact is made with Durham Tees Valley Airport and that the CAA would only comment on the proposal if there is a disagreement between the applicant and DTV Airport.

Page 17



______________________________________________________________

Durham Tees Valley Airport - Have made no written representations to date. National Air Traffic Services (NATS) – Have no safeguarding objections. Ministry of Defence – Raise no objections although have requested a condition be attached which requires the applicant to advise them prior to work commencing on site OFFCOM – Have advised that 4 operators may be affected and that contact should be made with each. Crown Castle International, who are responsible for providing the BBC’s transmission network and is responsible for ensuring the integrity of Re-Broadcast Links with particular areas, have raised no objection Joint Radio Company (On behalf of U.K. fuel and power) - Object as a result of interference with NEDL and Transco telementary links. CSS Spectrum Raise no objections to the proposal to develop a Wind Farm at this site. PUBLIC CONSULTATION The Local Planning Authority have carried out the following public consultation;

• Siting of 10 site notices within the locality, • Over 600 letters of consultation to residential and commercial / industrial properties

within a 1km radius of the proposed development. •

Based on the above ‘neighbour’ consultation exercise only one letter of objection has been received. The main issues of concern are as follows:

1) The wind turbines are an eyesore and will be highly visible from the upper floors of properties,

2) The proposal, if allowed will set a precedent for more, 3) The turbines will create a humming and swishing sound in an area where there is already

more than enough noise pollution. PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS

The consideration of wind turbine proposals is a balance between Government Policy and commitment to the development of renewable energy resources, with a general aim of reducing carbon dioxide emissions in line with international agreements, and the protection of the environment and residential amenity of any neighbouring occupiers. In assessing the application careful consideration was given to the responses from specialist consultees, interested parties and local residents. It is considered that the key issues in this case are:

• Whether the development is in accordance with National and Local Policy • Landscape and Visual Impact • Impact of Noise on Residential amenity • Impact on Nature Conservation • Health, Safety and other Issues

Page 18



______________________________________________________________

PLANNING POLICY Government Guidance, as contained in PPS22, supports onshore wind farms. There is a commitment to seeking to achieve a level of 10% of national electricity generating capacity from renewable sources by the year 2010. This guidance states that renewable energy development should be capable of being accommodated throughout England in locations where the technology is viable and environmental, economic and social impacts can be satisfactorily addressed. There is an acceptance that turbine siting will always be a compromise between maximising energy capture and minimising visual impact. The County Durham Structure Plan contains a section relating to Energy Generation and states that proposals for wind turbine developments must be assessed against Policies 80 and 81. Policy 81 offers general encouragement to the generation of energy from renewable sources. However, Policy 80 (A) requires account to be taken of the wider impacts of such proposals, particularly on the local environment and local communities. Policy 64 of the Structure Plan requires that the quality of the County’s landscape is maintained and enhanced by ensuring that amongst other things, attractive landscape characteristics are maintained and landscape distinctiveness is enhanced. Policy 67(B) aims to protect Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) from adverse impact by development proposals. There are no such sites within the vicinity of the application site. Sedgefield Borough Local Plan does not contain any specific policy that relates to renewable energy although there are key policies which need to be considered in the determination of this application, namely;

• IB2 – Designation of type of industrial estates • IB13 – Extension to industrial and business premises • T3 – Safeguarding Railway Lines • D1 – General principles for the layout and design of new developments • D4 – Layout and design of new industrial and business development • E14 – Safeguarding Plant and Animal Species Protected by Law • E21 – Development affecting the setting of a listed building

In considering the proposed wind turbine development it is considered to be somewhat different to a larger scale wind farm development which has no specific links to its surroundings. This proposal is a relatively small scale development located within an existing industrial complex intended to provide for the site operator. The proposal is considered as follows; WIND TURBINES WITHIN A GENERAL INDUSTRIAL ESTATE The proposed wind turbine development at the site is considered to be an extension to the existing premises as a result of it providing for the existing use. Policy IB13 of the Borough Local Plan requires the extensions of existing uses to not adversely affect adjacent industrial or business uses, not result in the over intensification of the site or not have significant detriment to residential amenity, traffic movement or the general character of the area. These matters are considered in the remainder of this report.

Page 19



______________________________________________________________

LANDSCAPE AND VISUAL IMPACT In order to assess the potential visual impact the applicant has submitted a number of photomontages based on the Zones of Visual Influence from various viewpoints. It is clear from the information submitted that the wind farms will be visible from areas outside of the application site. However, the visual impact of the turbines would be diminished by the presence of existing structures a number of which are relatively high. In view of the surrounding structures within both the Hydro Polymers site and adjoining sites, the full extent of the turbines would not be readily visible from the wider area. Instead, views would be of the turbine hubs and tips or just turbine tips. The proposed turbines would,however, be visible from both linear route receptors (roads, cycleways, footpaths etc) and fixed viewpoint receptors (scenic viewpoints, dwellings, settlements etc). In order to assess the significance of the effects on visual amenity at each viewpoint a detailed methodology is used to determine the magnitude of change at a viewpoint. For example, a moderate magnitude of change would be considered significant for a residential receptor, as the view is from their home and could experienced everyday. There are very few places where the view of the turbines would be constant as the majority of views from the surrounding highways etc will be broken as a result of the other structures on the site. The impact of the turbines on such views is therefore intermittent. The turbines are likely to have their greatest impact on the landscape when viewed from Preston Road to the East and from the housing development of School Aycliffe. Preston Road serves existing industrial premises and the view from here will allow the turbines to retain an industrial backdrop of the Hydro Polymers site and as such is not considered to be of any significant detriment. With regards to the residential area of School Aycliffe this is at an elevated position in relation to the proposed turbine site, being located approximately 500m to the west. The turbines will be visible from the residential area, although landscape features such as trees and the built development itself will significantly reduce the number of possible vantage points Furthermore, at this distance the scale of the structures is not significant, particularly as there are other structures such as buildings, chimneys and silos adjacent to the turbines. There are a small number of dwellings located to the south of the site, which are approximately 1km away. Both turbines would be visible from these properties, albeit having intermittent landscape features and vegetation between. In view of the distance from these properties to the turbines it is considered that although being continually visible, their scale would not result in any significant adverse impacts on amenity. The view from the wider area of Newton Aycliffe would be more intermittent as a result of a greater number of landscape features being visible and more distanced, which in itself significantly reduces the visual impact of the turbines on the wider area. In terms of the cumulative impact of wind turbines on the landscape and given their scale a degree of intervisibility between the proposed site and approved sites at The Castle Eden Walkway near Sedgefield and the Royal Oak site near Brusselton is to be expected. Much of this is of little consequence particularly where the cumulative impacts are of distant features or where features are viewed in different directions.

Page 20



______________________________________________________________

IMPACT ON RESIDENTIAL AMENITY Noise The applicant has carried out noise impact modelling of the proposed wind farm and the impact on nearby residential properties. From the data collected it is considered that the predicted noise levels fall below the threshold of 35dB(A), above which guidance from the Noise Working Group indicates a noise assessment would be required. The highest predicted worst case scenario noise level [33.9dB(A)] is at the new residential development to the southern side of School Aycliffe. A degree of protection is offered by the existing above average background noise levels in the vicinity. The table below indicates noise generated by wind turbines against other well-known noise sources in order to help give an understanding of the likely level of noise:

Source / Activity Indicative noise level db(A)

Threshold of pain 140

Jet aircraft at 250m 105

Pneumatic drill at 7m 95

Truck at 30mph at 100m 65

Busy general office 60

Car at 40mph at 100m 55

Wind farm at 350m 35 - 45

Quiet bedroom 35

Rural night-time background 20 - 40

Threshold of hearing 0

Source: TNEI Services – reproduced from PPS22 Companion Guide IMPACT ON NATURE CONSERVATION Durham Wildlife Services undertook a comprehensive survey of the wind cluster site and its environs, based on regular visits between April and June 2005 mainly to identify populations of Great Crested Newts, Water Voles, Badgers and Bats.

Page 21



______________________________________________________________

The ecological assessment indicates there being a ‘wild wood’ to the southern part of the site which is relatively undisturbed and which has a high ecological value for both fauna and flora including;

• 4 types of orchid; • Cukoos breeding on the site; • Goldfinch, Partridge, Tree creeper, Willow warbler, Meadow Pitt (nested on site); • Great Grey Shrike, Nuthatch, Tawny Owls and lesser spotted woodpecker using the

site; • Badgers, Foxes, Weasels, Mice, Voles, Shrews, Rabbits, Grey squirrel.

The survey concluded that the proposed turbine site developments do not impinge on any existing terrestrial habitats. Bat surveys were conducted during which time one bat was observed, however, the weather conditions were not considered to be ideal to survey bats. A third bat survey has since been carried out, although the results have not yet been received by the Local Planning Authority. As such a condition requiring the additional survey results and any appropriate mitigation measures has been attached. A great crested newt survey has been undertaken by Durham Wildlife Services, the conclusions of which indicate that there are a number of waterbodies within the Hydro Polymers Site and the adjoining site within 500m of the proposed turbines, all of which were surveyed for Great Crested Newts. The results of the survey indicate that no great crested newts were found although some smooth newts were present in several of the ponds and that no impact upon great crested newts will be caused and therefore no mitigation is required. Comments received from the Durham Badger Group consider the main Badger sett within the area to be far enough away from the proposed turbine site for it not be affected in any other way other than vibration, whilst comment that the effects of underground vibration from wind turbines is unknown. Concern is raised that there could be an outlier sett near to the construction area / route and advise that a badger survey be extended to the area immediately around the turbines. In view of the turbines being located on an existing industrial site, which is in the main hard surfaced, the presence of an outlier sett is considered to be unlikely. However, should planning permission be granted it would be prudent to impose a condition to allow a more detailed assessment to take place. English Nature consider that based on the submitted information the risk to such species appears to be low and therefore do not object to this application. HEALTH, SAFETY AND OTHER ISSUES Shadow Flicker

Page 22



______________________________________________________________

Shadow flicker arises from the passing of the moving shadow of the turbine rotor over a narrow opening such as a window of a nearby residence. The probability of this occurring and the extent of such an effect depends on a number factors including the orientation of the dwelling relative to the turbine, distance from the turbine, turbine hub height, rotor diameter, time of year and the proportion of daylight hours when the turbine operates. Only properties within 130 degrees either side of north can be affected in the UK and as a rule of thumb the dwelling at risk of shadow flicker must also be within ten rotor diameters of the turbine. In relation to this application this would be within 260m of the nearest turbine. The nearest property within the residential development of School Aycliffe is approximately 500m away. As such it is considered that shadow flicker should not affect surrounding residential properties. Low Frequency Noise (Infrasound) Planning Policy Statement 22 states: ‘There is no evidence that ground transmitted low frequency noise from wind turbines is at a sufficient level to be harmful to human health. A comprehensive study of vibration measurements in the vicinity of a modern wind farm was undertaken in the UK in 1997 by ETSU for the DTI (ETSU W/13/00392/REP). Measurements were made on site and up to 1km away – in a wide range of wind speeds and direction. The study found that:

• Vibration levels 100m from the nearest turbine were a factor of 10 less than those recommended for human exposure in critical buildings (i.e. laboratories for precision measurement).

• Tones above 3.0 Hz were found to attenuate rapidly with distance – the higher frequencies attenuating at a progressively increasing rate.

Air Traffic Safety The Civil Aviation Authority have offered no objection to the proposal but have recommended that the views of Durham Tees Valley Airport and the National Air Traffic Services are sought. At the date of writing this report (8th September 2005) no written response or objection has been received from Durham Tees Valley Airport . The National Air Traffic Services have offered no safeguarding objections to the proposal as have the Ministry of Defence. TV Interference Wind farms can cause TV interference. However, as advised by the BBC, this can usually be quickly addressed and rectified. Should planning permission be granted a suitable condition is suggested that would require the problem to be rectified by the developer. Property Prices No objections have been raised relating to a reduction of property prices, although it is necessary to point out that this is an issue that it is impossible to address as house prices are

Page 23



______________________________________________________________

influenced by many factors. As such this issue cannot be treated as a material planning consideration when assessing the planning application. CONCLUSION It is considered that the proposed turbines, in view of the number, scale and location would not have a substantial impact on the landscape and visual amenity of the area. Furthermore, in view of the distance between the nearest properties and the proposed turbines it is considered they would not be harmful or overbearing or detrimental to the residential amenity. Given the detailed Environmental Report and the content of the representation received it is considered that the proposed development would not be overbearing or detrimental to any residential amenity. Furthermore in view of the findings of the environmental statement submitted with the application it is considered there would be minimal impact on the ecology of the area or on the residential amenity of any nearby occupiers in terms of noise or shadow flicker. The application has been fully assessed on its individual merits and within the context of national, regional and local planning policies. It is considered that the environmental benefits of the provision of as much clean green electricity in a year as is used by around 300 homes whilst preventing the emissions to atmosphere when compared to fossil fuel powered generation of the equivalent energy far outweigh any visual impact of the use of this site as is proposed. HUMAN RIGHTS IMPLICATIONS It is considered that in general terms, the provisions of the Human Rights Act 1998 have been taken into account in dealing with the above application. RECOMMENDATION: Approve subject to the following Conditions 1. This consent is granted for a temporary period of 15 years from the date hereof when, unless the renewal of consent has been sought and granted previously, the turbines and their ancillary development hereby approved shall be removed and the land reinstated to its former condition in accordance with details to be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority. Reinstatement works shall be undertaken within a 6 month period immediately following the expiry of this permission. Reason: The development is such that it could not be approved for permanent development. 2. Notwithstanding the details of the development hereby approved the precise location of the turbines shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The turbines shall then be constructed in accordance with these approved details. Reason: In order to allow the Local Planning Authority to adequately control the details of the approved development. 3. Prior to the commencement of the development on site, the following information will be submitted to the Ministry of Defence, Defence Estates in writing; · Date of commencement of construction · Date of completion of the construction · The height above ground of the tallest structure · The maximum extension height of any construction equipment Page 24



______________________________________________________________

· The precise grid co-ordinates of the turbines · Whether or not the site will be lit. Reason: In the interests of Air Traffic Safety 4. Notwithstanding the submitted plans and prior to the commencement of the development details of the exact model and specification of the turbines including colour finish shall be submitted and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority: Reason: To enable the Local Planning Authority to control details of the development in the interests of visual amenity, and to comply with Policy D1 (General Principles for the Layout and Design of New Developments) of the Sedgefield Borough Local Plan. 5. Prior to the commencement of the development full details of the surface treatment and construction of all hard surfaced areas shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To enable the Local Planning Authority to control details of the development in the interests of visual amenity, and to comply with Policy D1 (General Principles for the Layout and Design of New Developments) of the Sedgefield Borough Local Plan. 6. No development shall take place until a report detailing a scheme for the investigation and alleviation of any electromagnetic interference to TV reception, which may be caused by the operation of the wind turbines hereby approved, has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The recommendations stated in the report shall be followed and, where necessary, any upgrading works implemented. Reason: To enable the Local Planning Authority to control details of the development in the interests of visual amenity, and to comply with Policy D10 (Location of Potentially Polluting Developments) of the Sedgefield Borough Local Plan. 7. No generation of electricity from the development hereby permitted shall take place until a scheme has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority providing for the remediation of any interference to radio telemetry links caused by the operation of the turbines. The approved scheme shall be implemented thereafter. Reason: To enable the Local Planning Authority to control details of the development in the interests of visual amenity, and to comply with Policy D10 (Location of Potentially Polluting Developments) of the Sedgefield Borough Local Plan. 8. That the wind-turbine noise level, when measured at a noise-sensitive property and when measured as LA90, 10 min should not exceed 5dB above the pre-established prevailing background noise level, once this background level has risen above: - 43dB LA90, 10 min between the hours of 2300 - 0700; - 35dB LA90, 10 min between the hours of 0700 - 2300. or whichever is greater. All measurements relating to both background and wind-turbine noise should be made using a type 1 sound level meter (as defined within BS EN 61672) fitted with a 1/2 inch diameter microphone, within free field conditions between 1.2 - 1.5 metres above ground level and at least 10 metres from any wall, hedge or reflecting surface. No measurements will be made inside residential properties. Reason: To enable the Local Planning Authority to control details of the development in the interests of visual amenity, and to comply with Policy D10 (Location of Potentially Polluting Developments) of the Sedgefield Borough Local Plan. Page 25



______________________________________________________________

9. Development approved by this permission shall not be commenced unless the method for piling foundations has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The piling shall thereafter be undertaken only in accordance with the approved details. Reason: To enable the Local Planning Authority to control details of the development in the interests of visual amenity, and to comply with Policy D13 (Development Affecting Watercourses) of the Sedgefield Borough Local Plan. 10. No development approved by this permission shall be commenced until a scheme for the provision of surface water drainage works including flow attenuation has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The drainage works shall be completed in accordance with the details and timetable agreed. Reason: To enable the Local Planning Authority to control details of the development in the interests of visual amenity, and to comply with Policy D13 (Development Affecting Watercourses) of the Sedgefield Borough Local Plan. 11. Prior to the commencement of development on site a detailed bat and badger survey shall be carried out and submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall then be carried out in accordance with the recommendations of the bat and badger survey unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To ensure the protection of bats and to comply with Policy E14 (Protection of Wildlife) of the Sedgefield Borough Local Plan. 12. No development approved by this permission shall be commenced until: a) a desk top study has been carried out which shall include the identification of previous site uses, potential contaminants that might reasonably be expected given those uses and other relevant information. And using this information a diagrammatical representation (Conceptual Model of the geology and hydrogeology) for the site of all potential contaminant sources, pathways and receptors has been produced. b) A site investigation has been designed for the site using the information obtained from the desk top study and any diagrammatical representations (Conceptual Model of the geology and hydrogeology). This should be submitted to, and approved in writing by the LPA prior to that investigation being carried out on the site. The investigation must be comprehensive enough to enable: - a risk assessment to be undertaken relating to ground and surface waters associated on and off the site that may be affected, and - refinement of the Conceptual Model, and - the development of a Method Statement detailing the remediation requirements c) The site investigation has been undertaken in accordance with details approved by the LPA and a risk assessment has been undertaken. d) A Method Statement detailing the remediation requirements, including measures to minimise the impact on ground and surface waters, using the information obtained from the Site Investigation has been submitted to the LPA. This should be approved in writing by the LPA prior to that remediation being carried out on the site. Reason: To protect Controlled Waters and ensure that the remediated site is reclaimed to an appropriate standard. 13. If during development, contamination not previously identified, is found to be present at the site then no further development (unless otherwise agreed in writing by the LPA) shall be Page 26



______________________________________________________________

carried out until the applicant has submitted, and obtained written approval from the LPA for, an addendum to the Method Statement. This addendum must detail how this unsuspected contamination shall be dealt with. Reason: To ensure that the development complies with the approved details in the interests of protection of Controlled Waters. 14. Upon completion of the remediation detailed in the Method Statement a report shall be submitted to the LPA that provides verification that the required works regarding contamination have been carried out in accordance with the approved method Statement(s). Post remediation sampling and monitoring results shall be included in the report to demonstrate that the required remediation has been fully met. Future monitoring proposals and reporting shall also be detailed in the report. Reason: To protect Controlled Waters by ensuring that the remediated site has been reclaimed to an appropriate standard. 15. The development of the site should be carried out in accordance with the approved Method Statement. Reason: To ensure that the development complies with approved details in the interests of protection of Controlled Waters. 16. Development approved by this permission shall not be commenced unless the method for piling foundations has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The piling shall thereafter be undertaken only in accordance with the approved details. Reason: To prevent contamination of groundwater in the underlying aquifer. 17. Prior to the commencement of any works on site, a settlement facility for the removal of suspended solids from surface water run-off during construction works shall be provided in accordance with details previously submitted to and approved in writing by the LPA. The approved scheme shall be retained throughout the construction period. Reason: To prevent pollution of the water environment. 18. During the construction period, and where relevant afterwards, any facilities for the storage of oils, fuels or chemicals shall be sited on impervious bases and surrounded by impervious bund walls. The volume of the bunded compound should be at least equivalent to the capacity of the tank plus 10%. If there is multiple tankage, the compound should be at least equivalent to the capacity of the largest tank, or the combined capacity of interconnected tanks, plus 10%. All filling points, vents, gauges and sight glasses must be located within the bund. The drainage system of the bund shall be sealed with no discharge to any watercourse, land or underground strata. Associated pipework should be located above ground and protected from accidental damage. All filling points and tank overflow pipe outlets should be detailed to discharge downwards into the bund. Reason: To prevent pollution of the water environment. INFORMATIVE The Environment Agency should be informed of any instance where the following is proposed : - more than 3500 litres of oil stored at any single private dwelling - more than 200 litres of oil at an industrial, commercial or institutional site INFORMATIVE: REASON FOR GRANT OF PLANNING PERMISSION

Page 27



______________________________________________________________

In the opinion of the Local Planning Authority the proposal is acceptable in terms of its impact upon highway safety, visual and residential amenity of the area, wildlife and ecology and in contributing to the reduction of emissions to the atmosphere and in the production of green electricity. Furthermore, the proposal is likely to reduce the demand placed upon the open countryside for similar development where there impact contrasts with the existing landscape. INFORMATIVE: LOCAL PLAN POLICIES RELEVANT TO THIS DECISION The decision to grant planning permission has been taken having regard to the key policies in the Sedgefield Borough Local Plan as set out below, and to all relevant material considerations: E14 - Safeguarding Plant and Animal Species Protected by Law E21 - Development affecting the setting of a listed building IB2 - Designation of type of industrial estates IB6 - Acceptable uses in general industrial areas T3 - Safeguarding Railway Lines D1 - General principles for the layout and design of new developments D4 - Layout and design of new industrial and business development

Page 28



______________________________________________________________

2. 7/2005/0431/DM APPLICATION DATE: 20 July 2005 PROPOSAL: CHANGE OF USE OF LAND FOR STORAGE OF BUILDING SUPPLIES

AND MOTOR VEHICLES (RETROSPECTIVE) LOCATION: TRIMDON SERVICE STATION BANK TOP BUNGALOWS TRIMDON

TRIMDON STATION TS296PW APPLICATION TYPE: Change of Use APPLICANT: D Parkinson The Sawmills, Yoden Way, Peterlee, Co Durham, SR8 4JE CONSULTATIONS 1. TRIMDON P.C. 2. Cllr. Mr K. Noble 3. Cllr. J. Burton 4. Cllr. T. Ward 5. DCC (TRAFFIC) 6. ENGINEERS 7. L.PLANS NEIGHBOUR/INDUSTRIAL Bank Top Bungalows:,1,2 Bank Top Terrace:,16,17,20,19,18 Greenfields Cleveland Avenue:,14,15,16,17,18 BOROUGH PLANNING POLICIES E9 Protection of the Countryside IB19 Agricultural and Forestry Buildings IB10 Industrial and Business Developments in the Countryside ___________________________________________________________________________ PROPOSAL Planning permission is sought for the change of use of an area of land sited on Bank Top to a builder’s merchants yard. The yard provides for a storage area for materials to the front of an existing established office units serving the business The storage area contains bricks, blocks, paving stones, aggregates and drainage materials. It is accessed through the garage forecourt area.

Page 29



______________________________________________________________

CONSULTATION RESPONSES FURTHER OBJECTION As part of the consultation and publicity process consultation letters were sent to the occupiers of adjoining properties, and a site notice was posted. A number of comments have been received in relation to the proposal. The occupier of 18 Bank Top Terrace has objected to the application on the grounds that development creates noise, dust and smells and affects privacy levels. There is also specific concern in relation to the safety implications of long vehicles entering the site. The occupier of 18 Cleveland Avenue has objected to the application, as it will affect their property due to noise, loss of a view, pollution, safety issues, and reduction in the value of their property. Concerns are also raised in relation to vehicular access to the site.

Page 30



______________________________________________________________

The occupier of 19 Bank Top Terrace has objected to the proposal on the grounds of the heavy delivery trucks which enter the site, the traffic disruption and general noise and disturbance, the dust and loss of light to the property. The occupier of 14 Cleveland Avenue has objected to the development on the grounds that: it has led to the increase in large goods vehicles gaining access to the yard, which will cause problems on and at the top of Watch Bank, the site is not large enough to accommodate large vehicles, yards supplying Heavy building materials are better off located in industrial estates away from housing areas, the negative environmental factors in terms of the increase in noise level as a result of the machinery, the appearance of the yard, the increase in dust, the proposal may infringe weight restrictions on the rural road through Trimdon Village. The occupier of 16 Bank Top Terrace has objected to the proposal on the grounds that the proposal will lead to an increase of traffic which may prove dangerous, and that the proposal will lead to dust in the area. The occupier of 17 Bank Top Terrace has objected to the proposal on the grounds that it will jeopardise highway safety and that the site appears unsightly. The occupier of 1 Bank Top Bungalows has offered their support for the proposal and encourages small businesses and promotes local employment. The County Council Highways Engineer has raised no objections to the proposal. PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS The application site is positioned to the north of the Trimdon Service Station, and is sited outside of the residential framework for Trimdon Village, as defined by Local Plan Policy E9. Thispolicy states that other than as specifically allowed by other policies in the plan, any development in the countryside will not normally be allowed. Local Plan Policy IB10 provides a means to assess new development in the countryside. The policy states that development in the countryside will normally only be approved if there is an essential requirement for a rural location. The builders yard at Bank Top, does not appear to provide an essential justification for its rural siting, with such forms of development being typically accommodated on general industrial areas. The proposal is therefore contrary to the provisions of Local Plan Policy IB10. Although located outside of the residential framework, the application site is in close proximity to the residential built up areas of Trimdon Village. It is therefore prudent to consider the proposal against the provisions of Policy IB9. This policy makes allowance for businesses, general industrial and warehouse uses outside of industrial areas, within a town or village provided that the proposal:

• Is not harmful to the general character of the local area, • Does not create a significant adverse environmental effect in terms of the living

conditions of nearby residents, or traffic movements: and • Does not prejudice the satisfactory development of a larger area.

Page 31



______________________________________________________________

It is however considered that the development is likely to adversely affect the residential amenity of the occupiers of the neighbouring properties. A development of this nature would normally be expected to be located in a general industrial area and away from residential premises. A number of objections received in relation to the application express concern over the impact of the development on their residential amenity through the use of the site as a builders yard and the associated creation of noise and dust, impact upon the visual amenity of the area, and through the delivery wagons and other commercial vehicles entering the site It is considered that general industrial development does not sit well in such close proximity to residential properties, as it leads to adverse impacts for neighbouring residents. The proposal is therefore considered to be contrary to the principles of Local Plan Policy IB9. In conclusion, the builders yard has no apparent justification for its rural location, and as such would contravene Local Plan Policy IB10. Furthermore, given its proximity to the residential properties in the north eastern area of Trimdon Village it is considered that the development is inappropriate in its location and would be to the detriment of the residential amenity of the occupiers of neighbouring residential properties HUMAN RIGHTS IMPLICATIONS It is considered that in general terms, the provisions of the Human Rights Act 1998 have been taken into account in dealing with the above application. RECOMMENDATION: Refuse for the following Reasons 1. In the opinion of the Local Planning Authority the proposal would amount to development in the countryside for which there is no proven agricultural or forestry justification. The proposal would therefore be contrary to Policy IB10 (Industrial and business development within the countryside) and Policy E9 (Protection of the Countryside) of the Sedgefield Borough Council Local Plan, which only allow for development in the countryside where there is an essential requirement for a rural location in order to safeguard the quality and appearance of the countryside. 2. In the opinion of the Local Planning Authority the builders yard would be contrary to the principles of Policy IB9 of the Sedgefield Borough Local Plan in that it would give rise to conditions detrimental to the amenity of local residents as a consequence of the undertaking of commercial activities on a site in close proximity to residential properties.

Page 32



______________________________________________________________

3. 7/2005/0443/DM APPLICATION DATE: 5 July 2005 PROPOSAL: REPLACEMENT WINDOWS TO FRONT AND INSTALLATION OF

FRENCH DOORS TO REAR (RETROSPECTIVE APPLICATION) LOCATION: 12 NORTH END SEDGEFIELD STOCKTON-ON-TEES TS213BS APPLICATION TYPE: Detailed Application APPLICANT: Mr J Walker 12 North End, Sedgefield, Stockton on Tees, TS21 3BS CONSULTATIONS 1. SEDGEFIELD TC 2. Cllr. Mr. J. Robinson 3. Cllr D R Brown 4. Cllr. J Wayman J.P. 5. DESIGN NEIGHBOUR/INDUSTRIAL North End:,5,7,9,11,10,14 Whitehouse Drive:,2,1 BOROUGH PLANNING POLICIES E18 Preservation and Enhancement of Conservation Areas ___________________________________________________________________________ INTRODUCTION This applciation was deffered from the previous Development Committee (19 August 2005) at the request of the applicant because he was unable to attend the meeting and wishes to speak in support of his application. THE APPLICATION SITE AND ITS SURROUNDINGS This application refers to a semi detached dwelling, probably rebuilt in the 1950’s or 60’s positioned on the eastern side of North End, Sedgefield. The dwelling is located within Sedgefield Village Conservation Area positioned between a footpath and Bells Stores retail premises. The application site is also subject to an Article 4 Direction (that restricts any alterations to the front of dwellings, without the benefit of planning permission). PROPOSAL This retrospective application proposes the retention of a number of Upvc casement windows including mock horizontal Georgian bars. Four are positioned along the front elevation, two at groundfloor level and two at first-floor level. To the rear, two Upvc windows are proposed at first-floor level, with one window and French doors at ground floor level, along the rear elevation. Page 33



______________________________________________________________

PLANNING HISTORY The applicant previously submitted an application for the conversion of the existing integral garage to living accommodation, replacing a garage door with a window (Ref: 7/2004/0322/DM). The application was approved (28/6/2004) subject to the applicant carrying out the development in accordance with the submitted plans. The submitted plans show timber a window to be put in place of the garage door. Since this time the Council has subsequently received another retrospective application from the same applicant for the retention of a rear conservatory, (Ref: 7/205/0550/DM) also at 12 North End, Sedgefield. CONSULTATION AND PUBLICITY RESPONSES The consultation response received from the Council’s Conservation and Design Officer states that: “Having examined photographic evidence from 1971, 1991 and 2004 there is clear evidence that the works (subject to this retrospective application) is in breach of Planning Regulations governed by an Article 4 Direction approved by the Secretary of State on 12/1/1993. Although the property was probably constructed in the 50’s or 60’s it is nevertheless included in the Article 4 Direction. Like-for-like replacement of windows and doors would have been exempt from the Article 4 Direction but the works have clearly created a material change in the dwelling’s appearance. In view of Local Plan policies, to preserve and enhance the conservation area in Sedgefield the works are contrary to these policies. Recommend refusal, and for an alterative scheme to be put forward.” No letters of objection have been received as a result of notifying adjoining neighbours, a site notice adjacent to the site and a press notice in the Northern Echo. PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS The most relevant policy regarding this form of development is Policy E18 (Preservation and Enhancement of Conservation Areas) from the Council’s Local Plan. In this instance, only criteria A and E are relevant, The Policy states that: - THE COUNCIL WILL SEEK TO PRESERVE OR ENHANCE THE CHARACTER OR APPEARANCE OF THE BOROUGH’S CONSERVATION AREA BY: (A) NOT NORMALLY ALLOWING DEVELOPMENT PROPOSALS WHICH WOULD DETRACT FROM THE CHARACTER OR APPEARANCE OF THE CONSERVATION AREA OT ITS SETTINGS (E) NORMALLY GRANTING PLANNING PERMISSION FOR THE CONSTRUCTION, REPAIR OT ALTERATION OF ANY BUILDING, STRUCTURE, ROAD OR FOOTPATH ONLY IN MATERIALS OF A TYPE AND COLOUR, AND WHERE APPROPRIATE WITH SIMILAR ARCHITECTURAL DETAILS, TO REFLECT THE CHARACTER OF THE AREA

Page 34



______________________________________________________________

Having regard to criteria A from the Policy, the insertion of upvc windows and doors would neither preserve nor enhance Sedgefield Village Conservation Area, as confirmed by the Council’s Conservation and Design Officer. Having regard to criteria E from the Policy, it is evident that the materials used for the development does not replicate the overall character of the surrounding area which is defined, partially, by the use of traditional materials. Paragraph 4.14 (Use of planning powers in conservation areas) from Planning Policy Guidance 15 (Planning and the historic environment) states that:

“Section 72 of the Act requires that special attention shall be paid in the exercise of planning functions to the desirability of preserving or enhancing the character or appearance of a conservation area. This requirement extends to all powers under the Planning Acts, not only those which relate directly to historic buildings. The desirability of preserving or enhancing the area should also, in the Secretary of State's view, be a material consideration in the planning authority's handling of development proposals which are outside the conservation area but would affect its setting, or views into or out of the area. “

Whilst the applicant site was probably rebuilt in the 1950’s or 60’s the Government has therefore made it clear (from the content of PPG 15) that it is not just the historical buildings that should be ‘preserved and enhanced’ through planning functions, but all buildings that are contained in the conservation area. CONCLUSION Policy E18 (Preservation and Enhancement of Conservation Areas) in the Council’s Local Plan clearly states that the Council will seek to preserve or enhance all conservation areas throughout the Borough, by not allowing development which would detract from the overall character or appearance of the conservation area or its setting and allowing alterations of buildings where the materials are of a type and colour and similar architectural detail that reflects the character of Sedgefield Village Conservation Area. In this instance the proposed retention of four upvc windows along the front elevation and three windows and a French door along the rear elevation would neither enhance nor preserve any positive aspect of the character or appearance of Sedgefield Village Conservation Area. Conversely the proposal has a detrimental impact on the appearance of the conservation area, by the use of non-traditional materials. Therefore use of upvc materials does not accord with similar architectural details to reflect the character of the area. Furthermore, Planning Policy Guidance 15 (Planning and the historic environment) describes that the role of the planning function is to preserve and enhance the whole of the conservation area, and not only historical buildings contained within it, because each element contributes towards the character and appearance of the Conservation Area.

Page 35



______________________________________________________________

HUMAN RIGHTS IMPLICATIONS It is considered that in general terms the provisions of the Human Rights Act 1998 have been taken into account in dealing with the above application. RECOMMENDATION: Its is recommended that the Director of Neighbourhood Services is authorised to investigate the possibility of issuing an enforcement notice for the removal of the seven upvc windows and upvc French door at the application site. In the event that the applicant does not comply with the possible Enforcement Notice it is recommended that the Director of Neighbourhood Services is authorised to investigate proceedings in the magistrates court in respect if the non-compliance with the Enforcement Notice under the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, Section 179. RECOMMEDATION: Refuse Subject to the following Reason 1. The retention of seven upvc windows and one upvc french door positioned on the front and rear elevations of a dwelling located in a prominent position within Sedgefield Village Conservation Area would detract from the character and appearance of the Conservation Area by introducing materials that is not characteristic to the conservation area. The development is therefore contrary to Policy E18 (Preservation and Enhancement of Consrvation Areas) which states that the Council will seek to preserve or enhance the character or appearance of the borough's conservation areas by not allowing development proposals which would detract from the character or appearance of the conservation area or its settings. In this instacne the proposed development would not preserve nor enhance Sedgefield Village Conservation Area.

Page 36



______________________________________________________________

4. 7/2005/0459/DM APPLICATION DATE: 29 July 2005 PROPOSAL: ERECTION OF 40 BEDROOM NURSING HOME LOCATION: FORMER TRAINING CENTRE DURHAM ROAD CHILTON FERRYHILL

DL170EX APPLICATION TYPE: Detailed Application APPLICANT: Mr W Morgan 38 Wellington Drive, Wynyard, Billingham, TS22 5QN CONSULTATIONS 1. CHILTON P.C. 2. Cllr. C. Potts 3. Cllr. T.F. Forrest 4. Cllr. B.F. Avery 5. DCC (TRAFFIC) 6. NORTHUMBRIAN WATER 7. ENV AGENCY 8. ENGINEERS 9. ENV. HEALTH 10. VALUER 11. L.PLANS NEIGHBOUR/INDUSTRIAL Lyndhurst House Hutton House Old Post Office House Chilton Library The Haven:,1,2,3,4 Southern Cross Healthcare Wood Lane Maybanks Rosewood Grange Raby Terrace:,3,2,1 Durham Road Villas:,1,2 Rosewood:,7,6,5,4,3,2,1 Hunter Terrace:,1,2,3,4,5,The Ford Terrace:,13,12,11,10,9,8,7,6,5,4,3,2,1 Victoria Terrace:,1,2,3,4,5,6 BOROUGH PLANNING POLICIES H22 Sheltered Accommodation, Residential Care and Nursing Homes D3 Design for Access D5 Layout of New Housing Development ___________________________________________________________________________ THE PROPOSAL Detailed planning permission was granted on 17 September 2004 for a 32 bedroom care home on the site of the former training centre Durham Road, Chilton. This consent has not been implemented and the applicant is now proposing to construct a 40 bedroom care home on the site. The building has elevations that provide attractive detailing with the strongest elevation in terms of design facing Durham Road. The design and appearance of the prominent elevation of the building that faces Durham Road incorporates attractive detailing including attractive Page 37



______________________________________________________________

traditionally proportioned windows with sill and lintel detailing. In terms of materials it is proposed to predominantly use a mix of brick and render with attractive traditionally proportioned windows with sill and lintel detailing. The main entrance to the building would be more contemporary with glazing at ground and first floor level. The site has a prominent frontage onto Durham Road, to the north are the Chilton Town Council Offices and Hunter Terrace, to the south a residential property know as Lyndhurst House and to the west public open space. The proposed development proposes both the main pedestrian and vehicular access from Hunter Terrace. There will be no vehicle access from Durham Road. As part of the proposal, alterations to the existing highway are required in the form of the creation of a turning head and parking spaces. CONSULTATION RESPONSES Durham County Highways advised that subject to amendments being made regarding the provision of a 1.8 metre wide footway and designation of car parking bays then no objections are raised. Environmental Health raised no objection to the proposal although state that any noise from machinery used on site should be minimised and that the burning of any material on site should not normally occur. The Environment Agency has no comments to make. To date no response has been received from Northumbria Water. The Council’s Tree Preservation Officer has advised that there are two trees on the site that are good specimens and add to the amenity value of the area and has suggested relevant conditions to ensure protection during construction. Consultation letters have been sent out to neighbouring occupiers, a press notice and a site notice posted. To date one letter of objection has been received from Southern Cross Healthcare Limited on the grounds that the area is already well served by both private and public sector provision and that there is already an over provision of care beds in the County any further provision will dilute the quality of the service available and further exacerbate the situation. PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS The main issues in this case are:

• Whether the development accords with National Guidance and the Policies contained within the Borough Local Plan

• Design and layout of the development and impact on neighbouring occupiers • Highway Safety and car parking

Whether the development accords with National Guidance and the Policies contained with the Borough Local Plan.

Page 38



______________________________________________________________

The proposed development has been assessed against National Planning Guidance in the form of PPG3 ‘Housing’, the locational requirements of Local Plan Policy H8 in which the application site is within the residential framework of Chilton, Policy H22 Sheltered Accommodation, Residential Care and Nursing Homes and Policies D3 and D5 that relate to design. In terms of PPG3 it states that it is important to create mixed and inclusive communities that offer a choice of housing and lifestyle and that Local Authorities should encourage development that secures a better mix. Policy H22 allows the development of nursing/care homes within the residential framework of Chilton provided that the development provided satisfactory vehicular access, parking, servicing and amenity areas in accordance the design policies, that the amenity of nearby residents are not adversely affected and that any surrounding uses would not be detrimental to residents. In addition, it is considered that the proposal would add diversity to housing tenure in Chilton. Design and Layout of the Development The development proposes the erection of a 40-bedroom two storey building that will be accessed via Hunter Terrace. The main elevation facing Durham Road is some 30m in length and incorporates a staggered ridgeline and building line that helps reduce the overall mass and bulk of the building but also ensures that the building reflects the character and scale of the surrounding buildings. Boundary details to Durham Road have not been submitted however on the previous application a brick dwarf wall and piers with railings was proposed and it is hoped that this would still be constructed. To ensure a good quality boundary treatment is constructed on this prominent frontage a suitable condition is proposed should permission be granted. Adequate internal bin storage has been provided and around all elevations of the building it is proposed to provide landscaping with the retention of two existing trees to the front elevation facing Durham Road. In terms of the impact on the amenity of neighbouring occupiers the proposed building is set in from the communal boundary with Lyndhurst House by approximately 3m at the nearest point and 7m at the furthest point. Lyndhurst House does have windows in the side elevation that face the application site but it is unsure if these are main habitable rooms. Therefore in order to ensure adequate levels of privacy for the occupiers of Lyndhurst House the side elevation will contain obscure glazing in first floor windows at first floor. In addition there is a high boundary treatment along this boundary that will provide additional privacy. In terms of overlooking from other elevations of the proposed building it is considered that the amenity distances are adequate and in accordance with the Council’s Supplementary Planning Guidance Note3 ‘Layout of New Housing’. Highway Safety and car parking An acceptable turning head has been provided with the provision of 13 car parking spaces and 3 public spaces available for use by the Town Council offices. The applicant has amended the layout to take account of the County Engineer’s comments including the provision of a 1.8metre wide footway. It is considered that the proposed alterations to the existing highway are an improvement to what currently exists and adequate car parking provision is provided and there is no detrimental impact on highway safety. Page 39



______________________________________________________________

In conclusion, it is considered that whilst the previously approved scheme was of a higher standard of design, particularly in relation to the elevations that front Hunter Terrace, this development would still make a positive contribution to improving the street scene of Durham Road and this area of Chilton. The proposed development is in accordance with both Government Guidance and Local Plan Policy and will contribute towards providing a better mix of housing in this area. The Care home is in a sustainable location and proposes a high quality design that will significantly contribute to the regeneration and overall character and appearance of this part of Chilton. Recommendation: Approve subject to the following Conditions 1. The development hereby approved shall be begun not later than the expiration of 3 years from the date of this permission. Reason: In accordance with Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990. 2. The development hereby approved shall be carried out only in accordance with the submitted application, as amended by the following document(s) and plans: plans received 31st August 2005. Reason: To ensure that the development is carried out in accordance with the approved documents. 3. Notwithstanding any description of the materials in the application, no development shall be commenced until details of the materials and detailing to be used for the external surfaces, including the roof and render colour, of the building have been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details to the satisfaction of the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To enable the Local Planning Authority to control details of the development in the interests of visual amenity, and to comply with Policy D1 (General Principles for the Layout and Design of New Developments) of the Sedgefield Borough Local Plan. 4. Prior to being discharged into any watercourse, surface water sewer or soakaway system, all surface water drainage from parking areas and hardstandings shall be passed through an oil interceptor installed in accordance with a scheme previously submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority. Roof water shall not pass through the interceptor. Reason: To prevent pollution of the water environment and to comply with Policy D13 (Development Affecting Watercourses) of the Sedgefield Borough Local Plan. 5. There shall be no discharge of foul or contaminated drainage from the site into either groundwater or any surface waters, whether direct or via soakaways. Reason: To prevent pollution of the water environment and to comply with Policy D13 of the Sedgefield Borough Local Plan. 6. No development shall take place until there has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority a scheme of landscaping which shall include details of hard and soft landscaping, planting species, sizes, layout, densities, numbers, method of planting and maintenance regime, as well as indications of all existing trees and hedgerows on the land and details of any to be retained, together with measures for their protection in the course of development. The landscaping shall be carried out in accordance with the approved scheme unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

Page 40



______________________________________________________________

Reason: To achieve a satisfactory form of development in the interests of visual amenity, and to comply with Policy E15 (Safeguarding of Woodlands, Trees and Hedgerows) of the Sedgefield Borough Local Plan. 7. All planting, seeding or turfing comprised in the approved details of landscaping shall be carried out in the first availble planting season following the practicval completion of the development and any trees or plants which within a period of 5 years from the substantial completion of the development die, are removed or become seriously damaged or diseased shall be replaced in the next planting season with others of similar size and species, unless the Local Planning Authority gives written consent to any variation. Reason: To achieve a satisfactory form of development in the interests of visual amenity, and to comply with Policy E15 (Safeguarding of Woodlands, Trees and Hedgerows) of the Sedgefield Borough Local Plan. 8. Prior to the commencement of development on site a detailed tree survey shall be carried out and submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall then be carried out in accordance with the recommendations of the tree survey unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. No trees on the site shall be lopped, topped, pruned or felled, without the prior consent of the Local Planning Authority. Any trees which are removed with consent shall be replaced with trees of such size and species as may be agreed with the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To preserve the visual amenity of the area, and to comply with Policy E15 (Safeguarding of Woodlands, Trees and Hedgerows) of the Sedgefield Borough Local Plan. 9. Trees that are to be retained must be protected following the guidelines set out in BS 5837:1991 Trees in relation to construction Chapter 8. Heras fencing back braced every other panel, with the feet permanently pinned in place is an acceptable solution. Connecting clips must have the nuts on the inside of the fencing. The fencing should be placed in such a position that the canopies are within the fenced areas. There shall be no storage of materials, machinery within the protected zone. Reason: To achieve a satisfactory form of development in the interests of visual amenity, and to comply with Policy E15 (Safeguarding of Woodlands, Trees and Hedgerows) of the Sedgefield Borough Local Plan. 10. Nothwithstanding the submitted plans and prior to the occupation of the building hereby approved windows in the corridor facing Lyndhurst House shall be glazed with obscure glass. A sample of the obscure glazing to be installed shall by submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The glazing shall be maintained and retained thereafter to the satisfaction of the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To safeguard the amenity of neighbouring occupiers and to comply with Policy D1 (General Principles for the Layout and Design of New Developments), 11. The car park shown on the plan hereby approved shall be marked out and made available for use prior to the development hereby approved being brought into operation, in accordance with details to be agreed with the Local Planning Authority. The car park shall be retained and maintained in accordance with the approved details for as long as the use remains. Reason: To make proper provision for off-street parking and to comply with Policy T9 (Provision of Car Parking) of the Sedgefield Borough Local Plan. 12. Notwithstanding the submitted plans no development shall be commenced until full details of all means of enclosure on the site have been submitted in writing and approved by the Local Page 41



______________________________________________________________

Planning Authority. The development shall be undertaken in accordance with these approved details unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: In the interests of visual amenity, and to comply with Policy D1 (General Principles for the Layout and Design of New Developments), and Policy D5 (Layout of New Housing Development), of the Sedgefield Borough Local Plan. 13. The development hereby approved shall not be occupied until the approved highway alterations and turning head have been constructed in accordance with the approved plan. Reason: In the interest of highway safety and to comply with Policy T6 (Improvements in Road Safety) of the Sedgefield Borough Local Plan. 14. Before any works are commenced, detailed drawings showing the existing and proposed site levels and the finished floor levels of the proposed new buildings and those (if any) neighbouring properties shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The works shall be completed entirely in accordance with these approved details. Reason: To ensure the existing ground and landscape conditions are protected from undue disturbance and to safeguard the amenity of neighbouring occupiers and to comply with Policy D5 (Layout of New Housing Development), of the Sedgefield Borough Local Plan. INFORMATIVE: REASON FOR GRANT OF PLANNING PERMISSION In the opinion of the Local Planning Authority the proposal provides for adequate on site car parking and manoeuvring space, adequate amenity space for future residents and is acceptable in terms of its scale, design and its impact upon the privacy and amenity of existing residents, highway safety and the general character of the area. INFORMATIVE: LOCAL PLAN POLICIES RELEVANT TO THIS DECISION The decision to grant planning permission has been taken having regard to the key policies in the Sedgefield Borough Local Plan set out below, and to all relevant material considerations, including Supplementary Planning Guidance: H22 Sheltered accommodation, Residential Care and Nursing Homes.

Page 42



______________________________________________________________

5. 7/2005/0506/DM APPLICATION DATE: 25 July 2005 PROPOSAL: CHANGE OF USE FROM RETAIL SHOP TO RESTAURANT (CLASS

A3) AND NEW WINDOW TO FRONT ELEVATION LOCATION: 5B MAIN STREET SHILDON DL4 1AJ APPLICATION TYPE: Change of Use APPLICANT: Savino's Cafe and Pizzeria 3 Main Street, Shildon, Co Durham, DL4 1AS CONSULTATIONS 1. SHILDON T.C. 2. Cllr. I. Smith 3. Cllr. L. Smith 4. ENV. HEALTH NEIGHBOUR/INDUSTRIAL Main Street:,1,3,5,7,9,20,22,13,15,17,19,15a,22a,5a BOROUGH PLANNING POLICIES S2 Acceptable Uses Within Town Centre S1 Promotion and Protection of Role of Town Centre ___________________________________________________________________________ PROPOSAL Planning Permission is sought for the change of use of a town centre property in Shildon to allow the expansion of an existing restaurant, which currently operates from the adjoining premises. The premises were previously used as a retail shop and the applicants are proposing to utilise former retails space as a seating area in conjunction with their existing restaurant. The application also involves the installation of a new shop frontage. CONSULTATION RESPONSES Shildon Town Council – No comments Environmental Health – No comments received Building Regulations Officer – Advised sound proofing between floors will be improved as a result of the proposals, although, if Building Regulations were required further works would need to be carried out. Occupier of flat above premises – Has raised concern over the provision of sound proofing between floors and over the increased risk of fire and requested that these be addressed prior to opening for business. Page 43



______________________________________________________________

Four site notices were posted within the town centre and no written representations have been received as a result. PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS Principle of the use The premises is located within Shildon Town Centre where there are a variety of commercial and retail outlets all of which group together to offer a range of provision. This proposal is to extend an existing use which, within Policy S2 (Acceptable uses within town centres) of the Borough Local Plan, is classified as being a suitable use within a town centre and which would normally be approved planning permission. There are numerous businesses within Shildon Town Centre, several of which operate as cafes and takeaways. However, officers are not aware of any premises operating as a restaurant. The existing business and its proposed expansion are therefore considered to make a beneficial contribution to the existing range of facilities and are likely to improve the town centres vitality and night time use. For these reasons the proposal is considered to be in accordance with the guidance of Local Plan Policies S1 and S2. Impacts on street scene and adjoining uses The proposed change of use involves the addition of a new shop front, which has already been partially installed. The shop front is in keeping with the frontage of the existing restaurant, which was replaced as part of the Town Centre Shop Front Improvement Scheme. As such, the shop front is considered to result in an improvement to the street scene. There is a residential flat directly above the premises to which this application relates which is likely to be adversely affected as a result of rising noise levels associated with the expansion of the restaurant and it being directly beneath the flat. There would have been a degree of noise associated with the former use, however, it is considered that a restaurant is likely to result in a greater level of noise. The issue of sound attenuation would normally be dealt with as a Building Regulation matter, however, the Building Control Team have advised that this change of use would not require Building Regulation Approval and as such it is considered appropriate to require sound insulation works to be carried out as part of the this proposal. The submitted plans indicate a new ceiling being created which incorporates a 250mm thick fibreglass sound damping acoustic insulation being inserted. Advice from the Building Control Team indicates that this will clearly improve sound proofing between the floors, although advises that additional works to seal the floor of the flat and to carryout remedial works to wall linings within the restaurant may have been required to comply with the requirements of the Building Regulations. In view of this it is considered a detailed scheme of sound attenuation and subsequent testing is necessary in order to ensure there is no significant detrimental impact on the amenity of the occupiers of the flat, which lies immediately above the premises to which this application relates. In attention it is proposed to impose a condition limiting the hours of opening and a condition restricting the use of the premises as a dining area only. With regards to the objectors concerns concerning the increased risk of fire it should be noted that the area directly below the objectors first floor flat will be utilised as a seating area only with the kitchen serving the existing restaurant and take away remaining in its present location at 3 Main Street.

Page 44



______________________________________________________________

In view of the above and subject to conditions being undertaken effectively it is considered the proposed use will improve the town centres vitality, viability and overall appearance without having any significantly detrimental impact on the surrounding properties. HUMAN RIGHTS IMPLICATIONS It is considered that in general terms the provisions of the Human Rights Act 1998 have been taken into account. RECOMENDATION: APPROVE SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: 1. The development hereby approved shall be begun not later than the expiration of 3 years from the date of this permission. Reason: In accordance with Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990. 2. The development hereby approved shall only be used as a dining area associated with the applicants existing business premises at 3 and 4 Main Street Shildon. Reason: In order to enable the Local Planning Authority to exercise control over any subsequent changes to the premises and to comply with Policy D10 (Location of Polluting Developments) of the Sedgefield Borough Local Plan 3. Prior to the use hereby approved being brought into operation a detailed scheme of sound attenuation shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved scheme shall be implemented on site prior to the use being brought into operation and shall remain as such unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To ensure that occupants of nearby properties are not adversely affected by noise from the premises, and to comply with Policy D10 (Location of Potentially Polluting Developments) of the Sedgefield Borough Local Plan. 4. The seating area hereby approved shall not be open to visiting members of the public outside the following hours 9.00am until 12.00 midnight (Mondays to Saturdays) and 9.00am until 10.30pm (Sundays). Reason: In order to ensure that occupants of the first floor flat are not adversely affected by noise and disturbance arising from patrons utilising the seating area and to comply with Policy D10 (Location of Polluting Developments) of the Sedgefield Borough Local Plan. INFORMATIVE: REASON FOR GRANT OF PLANNING PERMISSION In the opinion of the Local Planning Authority the proposal represents an acceptable town centre use which would not be detrimental to the main shopping function of the town centre. INFORMATIVE: LOCAL PLAN POLICIES RELEVANT TO THIS DECISION The decision to grant planning permission has been taken having regard to the key policies in the Sedgefield Borough Local Plan as set out below, and to all relevant material considerations, including Supplementary Planning Guidance: S1 Acceptable Uses within Town Centres.

Page 45



______________________________________________________________

6. 7/2005/0539/DM APPLICATION DATE: 9 August 2005 PROPOSAL: APPLICATION TO VARY EXISTING PLANNING APPLICATION

REFERENCE 7/1991/0366/DM TO EXTEND OPENING HOURS LOCATION: 1/2 MADDISON STREET SHILDON DL4 1NX APPLICATION TYPE: Detailed Application APPLICANT: Mr M Choudhury 16 North Lodge Terrace, Darlington, Co Durham, DL3 6LZ CONSULTATIONS 1. SHILDON T.C. 2. Cllr. J.G. Huntington 3. Cllr. G M Howe 4. DCC (TRAFFIC) 5. ENGINEERS 6. ENV. HEALTH 15/08/2005 05/09/2005 NEIGHBOUR/INDUSTRIAL Richmond Close 9,10,11 Adelaide Street 9,11.13,15.17 Byerley Road 221 Strand Street 45,49 Maddison Street 3,4 BOROUGH PLANNING POLICIES H18 Acceptable Uses within Housing Areas S9 Small Shops outside Town and Local Centres but within Towns and Villages ___________________________________________________________________________ INTRODUCTION This application has been brought before the Development Control Committee at the request of a local Councillor. THE APPLICATION SITE AND ITS SURROUNDINGS The application site forms a takeaway positioned on the corner of Maddison Street and Adelaide Street, Shildon. The site is adjoined by residential properties to the south-west, vacant properties to the south-east, a residential care home to the north and residential properties beyond. The premises are services by on-street car parking spaces along Adelaide Street and Maddison Street. PROPOSAL Page 46



______________________________________________________________

This application seeks to vary condition no.2, which was attached to the original planning permission (ref: 7/1991/0366/DM), which was approved on 8 October 1991. Condition number 2 relates to the opening time of the business, and states that: -

‘The premises to which this permission relates shall not be open for business outside the hours of 11:00am to 11:30pm on weekdays and Saturdays and 5:30pm to 11:00pm on Sundays.’

The reason for the permission stated: -

This condition is imposed in order to ensure that nearby properties are not adversely affected by the development.

The applicant is seeking to increase the hours of opening to 12.30am on weekdays and Saturdays and to 11.30pm on Sundays. CONSULTATION AND PUBLICITY RESPONSES Shildon Town Council has made no comment to date. Durham County Council as the Highways Authority have raised no objections to the scheme. Two letters of objections have been received as a result of the Councils consultation exercise. The letters raise objections to the scheme that include: -

• The premises already creates excessive noise and disturbances particularly through litter, car horns, loud music, slamming car doors, car engine noise and exhaust fumes

• The takeaway is already open later • Not acceptable in a residential area

A letter has also been received from the applicant in support of their application that raises the following points: -

• Confirms that they are not trading in their premises after 0000hrs • They usually leave the premises between 0030hrs and 0100hrs due to the cleaning that

must take place after the shop has closed • The staff are taken home in cars which are located outside the shop, and • Steps have been taken to limit those people trying to enter the premises after the existing

closing time PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS When dealing with a modification to a condition, the main consideration is the reasoning behind the imposition of the condition in the first instance. This is particularly important in this instance as there is no specific Policy setout in the Sedgefield Borough Local Plan that relates to the extension of opening hours on commercial properties. The reason for the permission states that it was required: ‘in order to ensure that nearby properties are not adversely affected by the development.’

Page 47



______________________________________________________________

The location of the takeaway is adjoined by a group of residential terraced properties along Adelaide Street. It is considered that they would be directly affected by the proposed development given the proximity to the entrance to the takeaway and that on-street car parking spaces are positioned directly outside these dwellings. The reason for the condition was to limit the impact on these residential properties. However, since permission was originally granted the character of the surrounding area has changed. Following the development of Richmond Close and the erection of a residential care home opposite the application site the immediate environmental is more residential in nature. Therefore the potential impact neighbouring amenity would be more significant now as opposed to 1991 (when permission was originally granted). The proposal to increase the opening times, particularly during the week beyond midnight would have a potential detrimental impact on the occupiers (and future occupiers) of these properties. Furthermore, since permission was originally granted the Council’s Local Plan was adopted in 1996 that aims to limit the potential impact new development would have on the occupiers of surrounding properties. Whilst there is no specific policy which refers to food and drink establishments within residential areas both Policy Policy H18 (Acceptable Uses within Housing Areas) and Policy S9 (Individual Shops) are considered to be relevant. These policies clearly set out to ensure that development outside the Borough’s town and local centres and residential areas does not have a significant impact on the living conditions of nearby residents. In this instance the property is adjoined by a number of residential properties along Adelaide Street, in close proximity to a relatively large residential care home and to other residential properties. It is considered that the proposed increase in opening times would not comply with the with the spirit of Policy H18 or Policy S9 of the Borough Local plan. CONCLUSION Having regard to the reason for the condition, the Policies set-out in the Sedgefield Borough Local Plan, and the proximity to residential properties it is considered that the extension of opening hours beyond midnight, particularly during the week would have a detrimental impact on the occupiers of adjoining properties. Given the changes in characteristics of the immediate surrounding area being more residential in nature the impact on neighbouring amenity would have a greater impact at the present time as opposed to when permission was originally granted (1990). Furthermore, since 1990 the Council Local Plan was adopted in 1996 that sets out Policies to limit the potential impact development would have on neighbouring amenity. In this instance the proposed development would be contrary to the principle of Policy H18 (Acceptable Uses within Housing Areas) and Policy S9 (Individual Shops) HUMAN RIGHTS IMPLICATIONS It is considered that in general terms the provisions of the Human Rights Act 1998 have been taken into account in dealing with the above application.

Page 48



______________________________________________________________

RECOMMENDATION: Refuse for the following reason: 1. In the opinion of the Local Planning Authority the proposed extension of opening hours would have a detrimental impact on the amenity of existing and future occupiers of adjoining properties and other properties in the immediate surround area. Policy H18 (Acceptable Uses within Housing Areas) and Policy S9 (Individual Shops) state that uses within residential areas or the development of small individual shops outside the Borough's Town and Local Centre will only be permitted without them causing significant harm to the living conditions of nearby residents. Extending the opening hours would therefore be contrary to the spirit of Policy H18 (Acceptable Uses within Housing Areas) and Policy S9 (Individual Shops), which collectively seek to secure and maintain a satisfactory level of amenity within residential areas.

Page 49



______________________________________________________________

7. 7/2005/0555/DM APPLICATION DATE: 4 August 2005 PROPOSAL: ERECTION OF 3 NO. DETACHED DWELLINGS (OUTLINE

APPLICATION) LOCATION: FORMER SALVATION ARMY EAMONT ROAD FERRYHILL DL178LY APPLICATION TYPE: Outline Application APPLICANT: Ellbeck Properties Ltd 1 Parker Terrace, Ferryhill, DL17 8JY CONSULTATIONS 1. FERRYHILL TOWN COUNCIL 2. Cllr. J. Higgin 3. Cllr K Conroy 4. Cllr. R A Patchett 5. DCC (TRAFFIC) 6. NORTHUMBRIAN WATER 7. BUILDING CONTROL 8. ENV AGENCY 9. ENGINEERS 10. ENV. HEALTH 11. L.PLANS 12. LANDSCAPE ARCH 13. POLICE HQ NEIGHBOUR/INDUSTRIAL Parker Terrace:,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9 106a Church Lane Kensington Gardens:,13,12,11,10 Dunning Road:,26,Staves Eamont Road:,1 Bowness Grove:,4 BOROUGH PLANNING POLICIES H1 Housing Development in Newton Aycliffe, Spennymoor, Shildon and Ferryhill H17 Backland and Infill Housing D3 Design for Access D5 Layout of New Housing Development ___________________________________________________________________________

Page 50



______________________________________________________________

PROPOSAL Outline planning permission is sought for 3 no. detached residential units on the site of the former Salvation Army Hall, Eamont Road, Ferryhill. The applicant is seeking approval in principle only with all matters reserved for subsequent approval. The application as originally submitted sought consent for the siting and the means of access to 3no. detached properties and was accompanied by a drawing showing the dwellings laid out along the centre line of the site. Whilst the drawing showed that the site was capable of accommodating three dwellings the positioning of the dwellings relative to those on Eamont Road, which runs at right angles to the application site, gave grounds for concerns. It was concluded that the proposed layout would have an adverse impact upon the appearance of area and in particular Eamont Road, which is characterised, by dwellings with large front gardens. The applicant was therefore requested to revise the proposal so that a more acceptable layout could secured. The applicant has therefore amended the description of the proposal and the application, which is the subject of this report seeks outline planning for 3 no. detached residential properties with all matters reserved for subsequent approval. This will enable officers to negotiate upon the siting of the dwellings at the reserved matters stage should outline consent be granted. CONSULTATION AND PUBLICITY RESPONSES Durham County Council, as Highway Authority, have no objections to the proposal. They have stated that the new vehicle accesses would need to be constructed in accordance with Section 184(3) of the Highways Act 1980, and that any means of enclosure to the site frontage should not exceed 1 metre in height to ensure that adequate visibility is maintained. Similar comments have been made by this Council’s Engineering Services Section. The Forward Planning Team considers the site to be appropriate for residential development by virtue of its sustainable location, close to jobs and services, and because it would enhance housing opportunities within Ferryhill without detriment to the existing infrastructure. They have pointed out the importance of ensuring the appropriate design standards are met in any future detailed proposals. No objections or comments have been received in response to the public consultation exercise which included individual letters to local residents and notices posted on the site. PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS The application site lies within the residential framework of Ferryhill and the proposal satisfies the fundamental locational requirements of Policy H1 of the Borough Local Plan. Policy H17 specifies criteria that must be met for infill sites and, therefore, the main considerations for this proposal are:

• Whether satisfactory means of access and adequate parking provision can be provided in accordance with Policy D3;

• Whether satisfactory privacy and amenity for both new and existing adjacent dwellings can be achieved in accordance with Policy D5; and

Page 51



______________________________________________________________

• Whether the development is in keeping with the scale and form of adjacent dwellings and the local setting of the site.

The site layout plan originally submitted with the application shows access and in-curtilage car parking that satisfies the requirements of the Highway Authority. Whilst the current standards would normally recommend a maximum provision of 1.5 spaces per dwelling, there is a demonstrable lack of off-street parking in the vicinity of the site, particularly in the case of the terraced housing in Dunning Road. It is therefore considered appropriate to impose a condition requiring the provision of two parking spaces per dwelling. This would ensure that development of the site would be unlikely to add to the existing on-street parking. The layout plan originally submitted with the application demonstrated that the site was capable of accommodating three large dwellings whilst at the same time meeting the Council’s privacy and amenity standards. It is therefore considered that future detailed proposals for the site could be achieved in a form that would comply with Policy H17. Notwithstanding detailed layout options secured during the course of negotiations, it is considered that any outline permission granted should reserve all matters for subsequent approval, together with other relevant conditions to ensure the satisfactory development of the site in accordance with the housing and design policies of the Local Plan. RECOMMENDATION: Approve subject to the following Conditions 1. Before any works are commenced detailed drawings or other specification of the following reserved matters shall be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: In accordance with Section 92 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 as amended by the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 2. Application for approval of the Reserved Matters shall be made to the Local Planning Authority not later than the expiration of THREE years from the date of this permission and the development to which this permission relates must be begun not later than the expiration of two years from the final approval of the reserved matters or, in the case of approval on different dates, the final approval of the last such matter has been approved. Reason: In accordance with Section 92 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 as amended by the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 3. Two in curtilage car parking spaces shall be provided for each dwelling hereby approved. Reason: In order to provide adequate on site car parking and to comply with Policy T9 (Provision of Car Parking) of the Sedgefield Borough Local Plan. 4. Notwithstanding any description of the materials in the application, no development shall be commenced until details of the materials and detailing to be used for the external surfaces, including the roof and render colour, of the building have been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details to the satisfaction of the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To enable the Local Planning Authority to control details of the development in the interests of visual amenity, and to comply with Policy D1 (General Principles for the Layout and Design of New Developments) of the Sedgefield Borough Local Plan.

Page 52



______________________________________________________________

5. No development shall be commenced until details of all means of enclosure on the site have been submitted in writing and approved by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall be undertaken in accordance with these approved details unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: In the interests of visual amenity, and to comply with Policy D1 (General Principles for the Layout and Design of New Developments), and Policy D5 (Layout of New Housing Development), of the Sedgefield Borough Local Plan. 6. The proposed development shall be served by a new access(es) constructed in accordance with the requirements of Section 184(3) of the Highways Act 1980. Reason: To ensure the formation of a satisfactory means of access in the interests of highway safety, and to comply with Policy T6 (Improvments in Road Safety) of the Sedgefield Borough Local Plan. 7. Notwithstanding the provisions of Class A of Part 2 of Schedule 2 of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995 (or any Order revoking or re-enacting that Order) details of any walls or fences or other means of enclosure shall be approved by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: In the interests of safeguarding the visual amenity of the residential area, and to comply with Policy D1 (General Principles for the Layout and Design of New Developments) and Policy D5 (Layout of New Housing Development), of the Sedgefield Borough Local Plan. 8. Notwithstanding the provisions of Class A,B,C,D,E,F,G of Part 1 of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995 (or any Order revoking or re-enacting that Order) details of any enlargement, improvement or other alteration to the dwelling(s) hereby approved and any buildings, including sheds, garages and glass houses to be erected within the curtilage of the dwellinghouse(s) shall be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To enable the Local Planning Authority to control details of any future development on the site in the interests of visual and residential amenity, and to comply with Policy D5 (Layout of New Housing Development), Policy H15 (Extensions to Dwellings) and Policy H16 (Extension to the Front of Dwellings), of the Sedgefield Borough Local Plan. INFORMATIVE: REASON FOR GRANT OF PLANNING PERMISSION In the opinion of the Local Planning Authority the proposal represents an acceptable infill/backland housing development in terms of its location within the settlement framework, and in terms of access, parking, privacy and amenity. INFORMATIVE: LOCAL PLAN POLICIES RELEVANT TO THIS DECISION The decision to grant planning permission has been taken having regard to the key policies in the Sedgefield Borough Local Plan as set out below, and to all relevant material considerations, including Supplementary Planning Guidance:H1 Housing Development in the Major TownsH17 Backland and Infill Housing Development

Page 53

This page is intentionally left blank

item 5 - monthly meetings calendar - march 2018 - durham ...democracy.durham.gov.uk/data/development...

Documents