Planning Services

COMMITTEE REPORT

APPLICATION DETAILS

APPLICATION NO: CMA/4/90 & CMA/4/91CAC

FULL APPLICATION

DESCRIPTION:

1. Office development and associated restaurant and cafés, information kiosk, Archimedes Screw, and public realm works; and 2. Demolition of former ice rink and Bishops Mill.

NAME OF APPLICANT: Maple Oak Limited

ADDRESS: Former ice rink site, Freemans Reach, Durham

ELECTORAL DIVISION: Elvet

CASE OFFICER:

Peter Herbert Senior Planning Officer Tel. 03000 261391 peter.herbert@durham.gov.uk

DESCRIPTION OF THE SITE AND PROPOSALS

Introduction 1. The application site extending to 1.3 hectares (3.2 acres) lies in the centre of

Durham City on the eastern bank of the River Wear. To the north is a public car park, with coach park beyond, and the Penny Ferry footbridge which crosses the river linking east and west banks. To the south is Milburngate Bridge which carries the A690 across the river. Running in a north-south direction to the east is Freeman’s Place, beyond which, at a higher level, stands the Walkergate development. This comprises the Gala Theatre, Clayport Library, food and drink outlets, and apartments arranged around Millennium Square, with multi story public car park below. To the west, on the opposite river bank, lie Milburngate House, within which two Government departments – National Savings and Investments (NS&I) and Identity and Passport Service (IPS) have offices, and the Radisson Hotel.

2. Currently occupying the site is a commercial shed that once housed Durham ice

rink, and more recently a bowling alley and health club, and the remains of the historic Bishop’s Mill. The application site lies within both the Durham (City Centre) Conservation Area and the setting of the Durham Castle and Cathedral World Heritage Site.

The proposal 3. This proposal seeks to demolish both the existing shed and mill, and develop

the site through the erection of two office blocks, one of which will incorporate a ground floor restaurant/café, an information kiosk incorporating plant and a café. An energy generating Archimedes Screw turbine, and associated public

open space to include river frontage access also forms part of the proposal. An application for planning permission and Conservation Area Consent for demolition of a building in a conservation area accompanies the application for the redevelopment of the site. The existing former ice rink building would be demolished to accommodate the proposed development.

4. The applications are accompanied by an Environmental Statement (ES)

covering a range of matters including; historic environment, landscape/townscape and visual appraisal, biodiversity, hydrology and flood risk. Additional comprehensive reports also provide information on community involvement, sustainability, transport, air quality, noise impact, geotechnical and mining risk assessment, site waste management and construction plan.

5. This planning application is reported to the County Planning Committee

because it represents a large scale major development. Detail 6. A proposed new office block at the north end of the site would accommodate

the relocated NS & I within 4,351m2 of floorspace over four floors including an enclosed plant deck. A proposed new office block at the south end of the site, as yet unallocated to a user, would provide 5,268.m2 floorspace over five floors including enclosed plant deck, plus 715.m2 of ground floor restaurant/café.

7. A split level area of pubic open space to the south of the office buildings, onto

which the restaurant/café would face, would be paved and landscaped for the enjoyment of the waterfront.

8. At this area’s eastern edge, adjacent to the Freeman’s Place coach drop off lay-

by, will be detached kiosk accomodating public utilities substations, a plant room associated with the Archimedes Screw, and a café and tourist information centre (floorspace of 141.31m2).

9. At the site’s southern edge, utilising the existing mill race, will be an energy

centre (with a floorspace of 235 m2) incorporating an Archimedes Screw. This would harness potential energy from the river to provide for most of the development’s energy needs.It is predicted that in the region of 76% of the developments energy needs would be met by this method.

10. A river frontage walk would be provided to run along the site’s western edge, to

include a riverside walk garden. This would link Penny Ferry Bridge to the southern public square. Further public open space in the form of an elevated terrace court would be formed between the two office buildings

Design 11. The architecture proposed is contemporary, the scale of which has as its key

objectives sympathy with immediate surroundings and historical context, and the protection of important views of the City and World Heritage Site, while delivering the required amount of floorspace to render the project viable.

12. The two proposed office blocks are essentially simple brick forms with vertically

proportioned punched openings and deep reveal to emphasise solidity. Each is distinctive with its own identity, yet both share a common concept. Brick colour, mix, tone and pointing style would reflect the Durham City vernacular.

13. The northern block comprises two north-south running converging wings linked by a central glazed atrium, with oriels, bays, galleries and cloisters acting as a foil to the brick form. These would be in timber, zinc and glass. An element of randomness has been introduced to the regular shape through projecting corners and variation in pier and window widths, creating an interesting rhythm.

14. The southern block comprises two east-west running converging wings linked

by a central glazed atrium and incorporates stepped terraces towards the river. In contrast to the northern block corners these are recessed to further reduce mass. As a foil to the soliditity of brick, terracotta external materials, zinc and glass would be also be used.

15. The roof-scape would take the form of a series of cascading terraces enclosed

in the main with horizontal brick parapets. Within the parapets would lie either low- pitched zinc clad seamed roofing which will patinate to a dull lead grey or paved accessible terraces. The western wing of the northern building would be surmounted by a seamed zinc- clad attic storey with a hipped, shallow pitched roof. This roof form extends to enclose the necessary rooftop plant. The southern building would be similarly topped off by low pitched zinc clad shallow pitched hipped roofs which in this case are simply detailed to meet the brick and terracotta wall planes.

16. Hard landscaping would consist mainly of high quality textured concrete, with

the selective use of natural stone to emphasise entrances, feature areas, and level changes. The vertical river frontage, where it meets the water, would be predominantly timber. Stainless steel balustrades will be used for pedestrian protection where there are level changes and along water frontages.

17. A lighting strategy for the proposed development, reflecting the Light and

Darkness Strategy for Durham (2007), would allow the river edge to go dark, with pedestrian areas lit to safe but low levels. There would be no external facade lighting, and internal building lighting would be moderated to lower levels towards the development edges.

Phasing 18. In terms of phasing, the proposed northern NS&I office building, kiosk and

hydro power installation will form phase 1, and the southern office building including office/bar would form phase 2.It is hoped that occupant interest in phase 2 will be such that it could be built straight after the completion of phase 1 as a seamless progression. Work is expected to commence soon after the relevant approvals are in place.

Benefits 19. The proposed development itself will have the capacity to create or retain within

the City 800 jobs, of which 395 will be associated with NS&I, retaining an important Government employer within Durham.

20. Although not forming part of this application, the applicant has identified future

opportunities to create a garden immediately to the north of the site, this land currently forming part of the public car park, and to puncture the lower western walls of the Walkergate development to form retail frontage to the eastern side of Freeman’s Place.

21. An initial intention to bridge Freeman’s Place to link Freeman’s Reach and Walkergate had to be abandoned when the Walkergate owners fell into administration. However, the two developments would still be connected at ground level through Freeman’s Place surface treatment.

PLANNING HISTORY

22. In 2005 the former Durham City Council Planning Committee approved an

application to replace the shed and Bishops Mill with 93 apartments, 6 living/workspaces, a local heritage facility building with outdoor cultural space, resident amenity space and underground parking. However, the application was subsequently ‘called in’ by the Secretary of State, and following a public inquiry in June 2006 the application was refused.

23. Refusal was based on the grounds of inappropriate scale, massing and bulk,

which was deemed to be out of character for the site in question.

PLANNING POLICY

NATIONAL POLICY

24. The Government has consolidated all planning policy statements, guidance

notes and many circulars into a single policy statement, the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF), although the majority of supporting Annexes to the planning policy statements are retained. The overriding message is that new development that is sustainable should go ahead without delay. It defines the role of planning in achieving sustainable development under three topic headings – economic, social, and environmental, each mutually dependant.

25. The presumption in favour of sustainable development set out in the NPPF

requires local planning authorities to approach development management decisions positively, utilising twelve ‘core planning principles’. The following elements of the NPPF are considered relevant to this proposal:

26. NPPF Part 1 – Building a strong, competitive economy – The NPPF outlines in

paragraph 19 that significant weight should be placed on the need to support economic growth through the planning system. Paragraph 22 specifically states that; planning policies should avoid long term protection of sites allocated for employment use where there is no reasonable prospect of a site being used for that purpose. Land allocations should be regularly reviewed. Where there is no reasonable prospect of a site being used for the allocated employment use, applications for alternative uses of land or buildings should be treated on their merits having regard to market signals and the relative need for different land uses to support sustainable local communities.

27. NPPF Part 2 – Ensuring the Vitality of Town Centres - Local Planning

Authorities should allocate a range of suitable sites to meet the scale and type of retail, leisure, commercial, office, tourism, cultural, community and residential development needed in town centres. It is important that needs for retail, leisure, office and other main town centre uses are met in full and are not compromised by limited site availability.”

28. NPPF Part 4 – Promoting Sustainable Transport – States that the transport system needs to be balanced in favour of sustainable transport modes, giving people a real choice about how they travel. It is recognised that different policies and measures will be required in different communities and opportunities to maximize sustainable transport solutions which will vary from urban to rural areas. Encouragement should be given to solutions which support reductions in greenhouse gas emissions and reduce congestion.

29. NPPF Part 7 – Requiring Good Design – The Government attaches great

importance to the design of the built environment, with good design a key aspect of sustainable development, indivisible from good planning. Planning policies and decisions must aim to ensure developments; function well and add to the overall quality of an area over the lifetime of the development, establish a strong sense of place, create and sustain an appropriate mix of uses, respond to local character and history, create safe and accessible environments and be visually attractive.

30. NPPF Part 8 – Promoting Healthy Communities – The planning system can play

an important role in facilitating social interaction and creating healthy, inclusive communities. Access to high quality open spaces and opportunities for sport and recreation can make an important contribution to the health and well-being of communities and planning policies and decisions should achieve places which promote safe and accessible environments.

31. NPPF Part 10 – Meeting the Challenge of Climate Change, Flooding and

Coastal Change – Planning plays a key role in helping shape places to secure radical reductions in greenhouse gas emissions, minimising vulnerability and providing resilience to the impacts of climate change, and supporting the delivery of renewable and low carbon energy.

32. NPPF Part 11 – Conserving and Enhancing the Natural Environment – The

planning system should contribute to, and enhance the natural environment by; protecting and enhancing valued landscapes, recognising the benefits of ecosystem services, minimising impacts on biodiversity and providing net gains in biodiversity where possible, preventing new and existing development being put at risk from unacceptable levels of soil, air, water or noise pollution or land instability, and remediating contaminated and unstable land.

33. NPPF Part 12 – Conserving and Enhancing the Historic Environment – Local

Planning Authorities should have a positive strategy for the conservation and enjoyment of the historic environment, including heritage assets, recognising that these are an irreplaceable resource and conserving them in a manner appropriate to their significance.

34. Technical Guidance to the NPPF – provides additional guidance to LPA’s to

ensure effective implementation of the planning policy set out in the NPPF on development in areas at risk of flooding.

REGIONAL PLANNING POLICY 35. The North East of England Plan - Regional Spatial Strategy to 2021 (RSS) July

2008 sets out the broad spatial development strategy for the North East region for the period 2004 to 2021. The RSS sets out the region's housing provision and the priorities in economic development, retail growth, transport investment, the environment, minerals and waste treatment and disposal.

36. In July 2010 the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government signalled his intention to revoke Regional Spatial Strategies with immediate effect, and that this was to be treated as a material consideration in subsequent planning decisions. This was successfully challenged in the High Court in November 2010, thus for the moment reinstating the RSS. However, it remains the Government’s intention to abolish Regional Spatial Strategies when Orders have been made under Section 109 of the Localism Act 2011, and weight can be attached to this intention. The following policies are considered relevant:

37. Policy 1 – North East Renaissance – requires strategies, plans and

programmes to support the renaissance of the North East of England by (inter alia) delivering sustainable and inclusive economic prosperity and growth.

38. Policy 2 – Sustainable Development – states planning proposals should support

sustainable development and construction. 39. Policy 3 – Climate Change – states all strategies, plans and programmes in the

Region shall contribute to mitigating climate change. 40. Policy 4 – The Sequential Approach to Development – requires a sequential

approach to be taken to the identification of land for development, with priority being given to previously developed land and buildings in the most sustainable location.

41. Policy 7 – Connectivity and Accessibility – seeks to promote the need to reduce

the impact of travel demand particularly by promoting public transport, travel plans, cycling and walking, as well as the need to reduce long distance travel, particularly by private car, by focusing development in urban areas with good access to public transport.

42. Policy 8 – Protecting and Enhancing the Environment – seeks to ensure,

amongst other things, to conserve and enhance historic buildings, areas and landscapes

43. Policy 9 – Tyne Wear City Region – supports the concentration of new

development around key centres within the Region. 44. Policy 24 – Delivering Sustainable Communities – planning proposals, should

assess the suitability of land for development and the contribution that can be made by design.

45. Policy 25 -, Urban and Rural Centres, seeks to ensure amongst other things

that the design of development in centres should contribute to the creation of sustainable communities and be in harmony with and enhance the built environment.

46. Policy 32-, Historic Environment, recognises the opportunities for heritage led

regeneration to be used in a constructive way to help bring about social and economic regeneration, and to encourage its potential for business, education and tourism

47. Policy 35 – Flood Risk – requires consideration to be given to the flood risk

implications of development proposals adopting the sequential risk based approach.

48. Policy 38 – Sustainable Construction – sets out that in advance of locally set targets major development should secure at least 10% of their energy supply from decentralized or low carbon sources.

49. Policy 39 – Renewable Energy Generation – requires at least 10% of the

region’s energy needs to be supplied from renewable sources. 50. Policy 54 – Parking and Travel Plans – seeks to support the delivery of

improved public transport throughout the Region, the promotion of travel plans and the provision and pricing of parking will be essential. Key elements include the marketing of public transport, cycling, walking and car sharing in trying to influence travel behaviour.

LOCAL PLAN POLICY: City of Durham Local Plan (2004) 51. Policy E3 - World Heritage Site Protection – seeks to safeguard the Durham

Castle and Cathedral World Heritage Site and its setting, including within both local and long distance views.

52. Policy E6 – Durham (City Centre) Conservation – seeks to preserve or enhance

the special character, appearance and setting of this area when considering development proposals.

53. Policy E16 - Nature Conservation – the Natural Environment – is aimed at

protecting and enhancing the nature conservation assets of the district. Development proposals outside specifically protected sites will be required to identify any significant nature conservation interests that may exist on or adjacent to the site by submitting surveys of wildlife habitats, protected species and features of ecological, geological and geomorphological interest. Unacceptable harm to nature conservation interests will be avoided, and mitigation measures to minimise adverse impacts upon nature conservation interests should be identified.

54. Policy E21 – Historic Environment – requires development proposals to

minimise impact upon features of historic interest, and encourage the retention, repair and reuse of visual of local interest.

55. Policy E22 - Conservation Areas - seeks to preserve or enhance the character

or appearance of conservation areas, by not permitting development which would detract from its setting, while ensuring that proposals are sensitive in terms of scale, design and materials reflective of existing architectural details.

56. Policy E23 – Listed Buildings – states that the Council will seek to safeguard

Listed Buildings and their setting by only approving aleterations and extensions that are sympathetic to their design ,scale and materials and not permitting development which detracts from the setting of a Listed Building

57. Policy E24 – Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Remains – seeks to

preserve scheduled ancient monuments and other nationally significant archaeological remains and their setting in-situ.

58. Policy EMP12 – Office Development General – permits new office development

within Durham City Centre.

59. Policy Q1 – General Principles Designing for People – requires the layouts of developments to take into account the requirements of users including: personal safety and security; the access needs of people with disabilities and the elderly; and the provision of toilets and seating where appropriate.

60. Policy Q2 – General Principles Designing for Accessibility – the layout and

design of all new development should take into account the requirements of users and embody the principle of sustainability.

61. Policy Q4 – Pedestrian Areas – requires that pedestrian area should be laid out

and designed with good quality materials in a manner which reflect the street scene.

62. Policy Q5 – Landscaping General Provision – sets out that any development

which has an impact on the visual amenity of an area will be required to incorporate a high standard of landscaping.

63. Policy Q7 – Industrial and Business Development – seeks to promote an

attractive image of the District and thereby stimulate inward investment through the provision of well-designed buildings which are appropriate to their designation.

64. Policy Q15 – Art in Design – encourages the provision of artistic elements within

new developments. 65. Policy T1 – Traffic - General – states that the Council will not grant planning

permission for development that would generate traffic likely to be detrimental to highway safety and/or have a significant effect on the amenity of occupiers of neighbouring property.

66. Policy T8 - Traffic Management - supports measures to improve highway safety,

amenity and ease congestion, and in particular, promote the safety and convenience of pedestrians and cyclists.

67. Policy T21 – Walking - seeks to ensure that the needs of walkers are

safeguarded, whilst accommodating the needs of people in wheelchairs, and those with walking difficulties and pushchairs. In particular the policy seeks to avoid conflicts with motor vehicles.

68. .Policy T10 – Parking - General Provision - states that vehicle parking should be

limited in amount, so as to promote sustainable transport choices and reduce the land-take of development.

69. Policy T20 – Cycle Facilities – sets out a requirement to encourage the

provision of facilities for parking cycles in the city centre and at other appropriate locations.

70. Policy U8a – Disposal of Foul and Surface Water – requires developments to

provide satisfactory arrangements for disposing of foul and surface water discharge. Where satisfactory arrangements are not available, then proposals may be approved subject to the submission of a satisfactory scheme and its implementation before the development is brought into use.

71. Policy U10 – Development in Flood Risk Areas – states that proposals for new

development shall not be permitted in flood risk areas or where an increased risk of flooding elsewhere would result unless in can be demonstrated that

alternative less vulnerable areas are unavailable, that no unacceptable risk would result, that no unacceptable risk would result elsewhere, or that appropriate mitigation measures can be secured.

72. Policy U14 – Energy Conservation – General – states that the energy efficient

materials and construction techniques will be encouraged. 73. Policy U15 – Energy Conservation – Renewable Resources– permits the

regeneration of energy from renewable resources provided that that no unacceptable adverse impact results upon landscape, nature conservation interests, the amenity, health and safety of local residents, noise and vibration levels, and upon areas of archaeological, architectural or historic interest.

RELEVANT EMERGING POLICY: The County Durham Plan 74. The County Council is currently developing a countywide Local Plan, and has

carried out a consultation on a “Preferred Options Draft” during the latter part of 2012. Reflecting NPPF guidance, the Draft currently proposes the former ice rink site to be redeveloped for employment use (Policy 23). Non employment uses will only be seen as suitable if they can be shown to support the functioning of the site for employment purposes.

75. Durham County Council Aspirations: Regeneration Statement 76. The Council’s Regeneration Statement (2012-2022) sets out the direction of

travel for regeneration and economic development, with the County Durham Plan one of the key documents intended to deliver it. The Statement sets out five key objectives for the regeneration of the County, with a “Thriving Durham City” being one of the five priorities. This seeks to exploit the City’s potential as a major retail, business and residential centre, academic hub and visitor destination, and deliver the cultural and tourism ambitions for the City which will benefit the entire County.

77. The emerging policies of the County Durham Plan seek to reflect the main

thrust of the Regeneration Statement by focusing development in Durham City, and other main towns, as a means of raising the economic performance of both the City and County.

78. The Statement includes a number of strands that aim to deliver a thriving

Durham City, one of which denotes the former ice rink as an employment site. The current proposal would fulfil that aspiration.

Durham City Centre Masterplan 79. The Freemen’s Reach proposal forms part of a larger Durham Riverside

Renewal as identified by the Durham City Centre Masterplan produced by Durham City Vision in 2007. The Riverside Renewal covers the area from Millburngate House to the Sands and comprises a mixed use development of offices, homes, shops and restaurants to regenerate an important part of Durham City and both safeguard and create in excess of 2500 jobs over a six to eight year period.

The above represents a summary of those policies considered most relevant in the Development Plan the full text, criteria, and justifications of each may be accessed at http://www.cartoplus.co.uk/durham/text/00cont.htm (Durham City Local Plan)

http://www.strategyintegrationne.co.uk/document.asp?id=887 (Regional Spatial Strategy for the North East)

http://www.communities.gov.uk/documents/planningandbuilding/pdf/2116950.pdf (National Planning Policy

Framework)

http://www.durham.gov.uk/pages/Service.aspx?ServiceId=856 (County Durham Plan)

http://www.durham.gov.uk/Pages/Service.aspx?ServiceId=7604 (Regeneration Statement)

http://www.bishopaucklandtownhall.org.uk/durhamcc/etech/DCCMinutes.nsf/375078fce317fabb80256aef003c01ac/6ac2a0e1a519937e802572650058d377?OpenDocument

CONSULTATION AND PUBLICITY RESPONSES

STATUTORY RESPONSES:

80. The Highway Authority – It is noted that the specific physical constraints of the

site in relation to the existing public highway have been considered in drawing up a plan for construction. The proposed Construction Logistics Plan (CLP) is considered to be acceptable subject to amendments.

81. The city centre location of the site influences sustainable travel and servicing to

the development. The development will not accommodate car parking provision which is appropriate for this location in close proximity to City Centre car parks. Officers are satisfied that the site is located in a suitable location to promote sustainable transport and that no on site parking should be provided. The consultant has indicated 52 spaces for cycle parking are to be provided for both phases of the development. This is acceptable.

82. The Transport Assessment has demonstrated the trip generation and

distribution can be accommodated on the highway network and that parking demand including that for disabled persons, can be accommodated in City centre car parks within the vicinity. It is considered the assumptions used in the assessment of trip generation are acceptable and parking provision would be appropriate. A materiality test and assessment of junctions impacted by traffic generation is acceptable. It has been demonstrated that most significant impact is experienced at the Claypath/ Providence Row junction during the pm peak. A transit model of the signalised junction has demonstrated that impacts are within acceptable parameters.

83. Concerns are shared with the CTC about cycling facilities to and through the

site. Whilst the existing highway at Freemans Place would provide a facility for south to north bound cycle traffic, cycle traffic cannot legally proceed north to south due to the one way arrangement. It is understood that the riverside 'walkway' and central 'linking passage' would provide facility for cycle traffic to proceed from the Millennium Bridge to Freemans Place and onward to back of Silver Street (south bound) and also to reach cycle parking provision in the linking passage. No reference is made to the riverside route in the transport assessment or legal access to cycle parking facility.

84. Officers request that a condition is placed on the developer that legal

permission and highway signing is in place to permit cyclists to use the riverside route, paved areas and linking passage legally. If the Riverside route is to be used for cycling its design would need to be amended to ensure unobstructed sight lines between cyclists and pedestrians and adequate widths for both users to share the route. Pinch points at the Riverside Walk Garden, and Kiosk area would result in unacceptable pedestrian cyclist conflict. No drawings have been provided as part of the application to indicate adequate widths.

85. Cycling in public areas can be a contentious issue and as the developments sits

alongside the National Cycle Network route 14 it may attract higher levels of

cycling trips. Officers consider that this should be reported to members as to date no cycling is supported in Silver Street or Market Place Durham.

86. Loading bays and coach drop off point have been provided at the Freemans

Place boundary. The bays will require traffic regulation orders and suitable road markings for which the developer must meet the costs. The road markings are not shown on any of the drawings submitted. Within the detailed design the developer should include for appropriate edge blocks to delineate markings. The extent of the adopted highway and detail of construction should be agreed prior to construction commencing. A drop off pick up point is also indicated on Freemans Place. This would be impossible to enforce with traffic regulation orders and would result in a free parking space for users. Officers therefore insist this element is removed from the scheme. Detailed design of paving should include appropriate paving at stair heads to indicate their presence to visually impaired persons. The detailed paving design should include this feature.

87. In summary officers request that a condition is placed on the developer that

details of cycle route, paving at stair heads loading bays, and construction on Freemans Place are submitted in writing and agreed with the Highway Authority prior to commencement of construction of the site. Subject to the condition officers would not object to the proposal on highway grounds.

88. The Environment Agency – raise no objection to this proposal provided that

recommendations made within the submitted Flood Risk Assessment are carried out. These recommendations include the limiting of surface water run-off, the provision of safe routes into and out of the site, minimum floor level heights, the installation of a flood warning system, the use of flood resilient construction methods, and flood warning signage.

89. The eradication and control of Japanese Knotweed, Giant Hogweed and

Himalayan Balsam is also a condition of the Agency’s position. The invasive nature of such species is considered to be harmful to the site’s nature conservation value.

90. Both issues are requested to be addressed through planning condition should

permission be granted. 91. The Agency is also the government’s regulatory body responsible for assessing

the potential impacts of hydropower developments in England. Regulation of hydropower is through a series of consents and licenses, referred to as a hydropower “Permit”. This permit covers such matters as fish passage, quantities of water, and flood risk. The protection of the aquatic environment is paramount in any decision taken by the Agency when assessing hydropower schemes.

92. The proposed Archimedes screw turbine has been subjected to Environment

Agency scrutiny, with reference made to the Agency’s Hydropower Good Practice Guidelines, and it has been concluded that such turbines have little or no impact on fish and other aquatic organisms passing through them. It has been noted that the developers intend installing a twin flight Larinier fish pass with resting pools and eel pass as part of their proposals. The Agency is of the opinion that this will improve fish passage along this section of the Wear as the site currently presents a significant barrier to coarse fish species.

93. The installation of fish monitoring equipment will also assist the Environment Agency in both assessing the scheme’s impact and regulating its operation in order to protect the many fish species that are present. The data collected will be used by the agency on a daily basis and will supplement that already collected from the existing fish counter at Framwellgate Dam.

94. Should planning permission be granted, the Agency will continue to work with

the developers to optimie fish passage as part of the permitting process. 95. Northumbrian Water – states that, having assessed the proposed developments

predicted impact upon its assets, and the capacity within Northumbrian Water to accommodate and treat anticipated flows, no concerns are raised.

96. Natural England – refers the Local Planning Authority to its standing advice that

relates to the safeguarding of protected species as, in Natural England’s view, this proposal would not impact on any protected areas.

97. The Coal Authority – states that the application site does not fall within the

defined Coal Mining Development Referral Area. The application site is located instead within the defined Standing Advice Area, meaning that there is no requirement under the risk-based approach that has been agreed with the LPA, for a Coal Mining Risk Assessment to be submitted or for The Coal Authority to be consulted. In accordance with the agreed approach to assessing coal mining risks as part of the development management process, if this proposal is granted planning permission, it will be necessary to include The Coal Authority’s Standing Advice within the Decision Notice as an informative note to the applicant in the interests of public health and safety.

98. English Heritage – Are satisfied that the form, scale and architectural detailing

of the proposal would enhance this part of the Conservation Area, providing a quality development and activity to a currently poor quality part of the City. The scale and design of the buildings would not harm the setting, or the Outstanding Universal Value of the world heritage Site. They are also of the opinion that the public benefit provided through the provision of the hydro plant would outweigh the harm caused by the demolition of Bishop’s Mill. In conclusion, it is recommended that planning permission be approved subject to appropriate conditions

INTERNAL CONSULTEE RESPONSES: 99. Spatial Policy – state that although the application site is not allocated for any

specific purpose in the Local Plan, its redevelopment for the purposes proposed conforms with RSS objectives that recognise Durham City as a strategic transport hub and employment location. It is also recognised that the Durham City Centre Masterplan identifies Freemans Reach as a critical redevelopment priority.

100. The latest version of the County Durham Plan (Preferred Options – September

2012) sets out a spatial approach which identifies Durham city as a key location for new development. The plan prioritises the development of land and buildings around the historic core in support of the City’s key role as an employment, housing, retail and tourism centre.

101. The former ice rink site is viewed as offering substantial potential for bringing

forward more high value employment into Durham City, and acting as a catalyst

for other development within the City such as the creation of a new movement circuit, and opportunities at Milburngate House, The Gates and North Road.

102. The proposals are considered to accord with the prime aim of the NPPF which

is stated to be a presumption in favour of sustainable development. Proposals that are within the most readily accessible locations, and offer regenerative benefits, accord with the definition of sustainable development set out in the NPPF.

103. Design and Historic Environment - considers this proposal to hold the potential

for being an exciting, new and distinctive location for the City, adding to Durham’s existing strengths. The design and massing is stated to be well considered, with the development’s full impact well understood through the submitted visual representations. It is acknowledged that the proposals’ highest point exceeds that of the existing ice rink shed. However, that is not seen as being a negative feature, and should be evaluated as part of the wider scheme. The loss of the Mill is accepted as being outweighed by the development’s wider public benefits. Therefore the applications are supported.

104. The challenging issues of mitigation have been and are still being refined.

These address water management, species protection and landscape sensitivities and have all been strongly and energetically explored to ensure that the ‘whole’ of Durham’s environmental qualities and special relationships with its natural as well as built environment delivers a ‘good’ scheme for the immediate and long term sustainability of this valuable resource for the future.

105. Landscape - The Council Landscape Architect raises no concerns regarding the

hard and soft landscape proposals other than it being a condition of any planning approval that full planting, species and maintenance details be agreed prior to landscape implementation. The County Council Technical Support Officer (Open Spaces) offers no objection in principle to what is proposed but would require full planting details prior to any decision concerning adoption being made.

106. Arboriculture – The application has been submitted to coincide with another

application regarding the redevelopment of this site and further to the east, which is currently the car park which is utilised by visitors into Durham City and the local attractions.

107. The Trees along the Northern boundary of the site appear to be self-seeded,

however, do contribute to the local landscape collectively and assumingly contributes to the stability of the bank-side. It appears that to facilitate the development, 18 Trees would be removed and a further 5 would be crown reduced by 3 metres.

108. It is requested that a suitable re-planting of trees of a suitable size (18-20 cm )

girth is conditioned to replace the trees removed , that will hopefully enhance the local area again and provide feeing opportunities and cover for local bat populations, following completion of the re-development. Advice is provided regarding bats when carrying out tree work.

109. Archaeology –has had extensive discussions with the applicant’s archaeological

contractors regarding the information necessary for this application to be supported. The results of a desk based assessment and field evaluations have been supplied, and the findings accepted. At this point no archaeological remains of overriding importance are believed to be present, so subject to the

proposed mitigation strategy being carried out, and appropriate recordings made, no objections are raised.

110. Ecology - The Council Ecologist has drawn attention to the presence of otters

and Common Pipistrelle, Soprano Pipistrelle and Daubenton’s bats, all of which are classified as European Protected Species under the terms of the Habitats and Species Regulations 2010. Impact mitigation is necessary, and an agreed Mitigation Strategy has been submitted. This involves the placing of bat boxes beneath Milburngate Bridge, and replicating the Daubenton’s bat habitat, to be lost below Bishop’s Mill when it is demolished. This would be done by creating an otter holt and Daubenton’s bat roost close -by a little way along the river frontage. Such mitigation should be a condition of any planning consent.

111. The Council’s ecologist and Natural England are satisfied that the latest

ecological mitigation proposals for dealing with bats, otter and breeding birds are sufficiently robust with an adequate timetable for the works and offer a viable methodology for keeping protected species on site. There are still some minor concerns over lighting but if planning permission is granted then it is suggested a condition be imposed requiring compliance with the mitigation strategy.

112. Pollution Control – note that pre-planning application discussions between the

Council’s pollution control officer and the applicant’s consultants have informed the content of the submitted air quality impact assessment, which has identified traffic associated with the development’s construction and then traffic associated with its use as the main source of emissions impacting upon air quality, together with such activities as on-site crushing and screening during the construction phase The air quality assessment has determined the increase in traffic generated by the development and this has been used to determine the overall impact on nitrogen dioxide concentration levels at identified peripheral locations.The overall impact on emissions of nitrogen dioxide was determined as ‘negligible’.

113. The main pollutant of concern during the construction phase is from Particulate

Matter comprising of both PM10 and PM2.5 fractions that have been identified as pollutants of public health significance and from nuisance dust blowing from the site onto neighbouring property. In accordance with the Institute of Air Quality Management Guidance the potential for emissions of particulate pollutants comprising of both PM10 and PM2.5 fractions were determined as ‘negligible’. However it is recognised the effectiveness of controlling dust of all fraction sizes is dependent on mitigation measures carried out. Therefore it is recommend a condition be included that the applicant submit for the approval of the Local Planning Authority a Dust Action Plan based on the precise details of the construction phase activities when these are known

114. Sustainability – fully support this proposal on the basis of its renewal energy

use. The fact that the Archimedes Screw turbine would provide 76% of the predicted energy demand of the development renders the scheme highly sustainable, and would significantly contribute to the County Council’s aspiration to reduce County Durham emissions by 40% by 2020.

115. Regeneration and Economic Development – states this proposal offers many

benefits which include the securing of major public centre employment in Durham’s City Centre; the creation of opportunities for further employment use; the creation of a riverside attraction through a combination of the Archimedes Screw and the riverside walk and associated leisure use; the unlocking the

wider regenerative potential of Freemans Place, Walkergate and Milburngate House; the delivery of an attractive group of buildings that will impact positively on the Conservation Area and not detract from the setting of the World Heritage Site; a level of design refinement that will support the City’s unique historic environment; and the removal of the negative impact caused by an underused site and inappropriate building.

116. Access and Rights of Way – advises that there are no recorded public rights of

way affecting or lying through this area. It is noted that the Definitive Map is only a register of recorded public rights. Other rights can be acquired on the basis of usage, or documentary evidence, and/or the actions of a landowner. So there may be other paths which are not recorded but legally exist. The application form states that new public rights of way are to be provided. It is assumed that this refers to the 'riverside walk' element of the proposals. This new route along the City's riverside is welcomed as it would enable the public to access a section of the riverside where access has previously been impossible.

117. Officers could not determine from the proposals what status the riverside walk

would take: adopted highway/footways, Public Rights of Way, permissive/privately maintained routes. It is assumed that the riverside walk would be maintained along with the rest of the public realm / paved areas. Having these as adopted footways or privately maintained surfaces would beofficer preferred choice.

PUBLIC RESPONSES: 118. The proposals were displayed at two separate public exhibitions held by the

applicant at the Durham Town Hall on 29 June and at the Gala Theatre on 17 October 2012. These offered interested parties, including the general public, the opportunity to view visualisations and a model of the Freemans Reach scheme, and have questions answered by the applicant and agent

119. The applications were also advertised by site notice and in the local press as

part of the planning procedures. Individual notification letters were also sent to a number of properties in the vicinity of the site.

120. The City of Durham Trust – acknowledges this proposal to be an improvement

upon that which was the subject of the previous called in application. However, they do not consider it to be the “finished article”. The main concerns are the buildings’ height (the northern block rising 3.9 m above the ridgeline of the existing shed), a lack of cascading form towards the river as described by the applicants, an over- heavy appearance to the massing, no superimposition of the proposal on the form of the shed and resulting uncertainty as to townscape impact, lack of window form rhythm, impact on riverside trees, a lost opportunity to make more of the riverside walk, and uncertainty as to when the second phase of the development would be implemented.

121. The Cyclist Touring Club (CTC) – draw attention to the fact that although the

National Cycle Network passes along Freemans Reach, it is necessary to dismount if traveling south due to the no entry traffic order. It is therefore requested that the route be diverted through the application site along the riverside frontage.

122. The Angling Trust and John Hepworth on behalf Durham City Angling Club –

object to the proposed Archimedes Screw on the grounds of potential harm to

fish. It is argued that the “tiny contribution to the UK’s energy needs” the turbine would make is far outweighed by the loss of fish through making physical contact with the screw, and the loss of fish through the loss or change of habit in reaches of river from which water is diverted. An absence of evidence in respect of exact fish species using this part of the river, and absence of exact water flow rates are also cited as being unacceptable, pointing to an inadequate analysis of harm to fish in the submitted documents.

123. The Angling Trust and Durham City Angling Club acknowledge that Archimedes

Screws are less harmful to fish than some other types of turbine, but it is not accepted that they are fish friendly. So whilst it is accepted that a scheme sympathetic to fish may be possible, it is considered that this has yet to be demonstrated, and therefore the turbine element of the proposals should be refused.

124. A Durham City resident has written that, although not entirely happy about the

replacement of the former ice rink with a large office complex, she finds the architecture “pleasing”, and acknowledges the need to encourage employment within the City. She approves of public access to the riverside and the turbine, but this is qualified by a necessity to preserve the history of Bishops Mill through some on-site interpretation, something she understands the developers to be willing to do.

125. The Archimedes Screw is particularly welcomed as both a sustainable energy

source and a reference to the historic mill. However, a note of caution is struck regarding the absence of on-site car parking, which it is said would lead to those working in the proposed offices to occupy nearby public car park spaces, leading to additional traffic using the Providence Row approach Road and other local roads and streets, and the denial of public car park spaces to City visitors.

126. Jones Lang LaSalle - acting on behalf of the Receivers of the Walkergate

development to the east of the application site are broadly supportive of the proposals, considering the delivery of complimentary uses on each site to be mutually beneficial. However, concern has been expressed regarding the coach drop off layby in front of the proposed kiosk. Should coaches park there for any length of time, it is said that a physical barrier between the two sites would occur, to the detriment of the integration of Freemans Reach and Walkergate. A planning condition restricting the waiting period is therefore requested should planning permission be granted.

APPLICANTS STATEMENT: 127. This proposal is considered to be fully compliant with all relevant National,

Regional, and Local Planning Policies. 128. Full account has been taken of the Development Brief for the site, and the

developers have worked closely with Durham County Council and English Heritage prior to a formal planning submission being made in order to achieve a high standard of design and fully address all other relevant issues arising from the site’s prominent and sensitive position. Extensive public consultation has taken place including two public exhibitions.

129. The provision of office space for NS&I will retain jobs within Durham City, whilst

the additional office space will provide further employment opportunities in a

prestigious and sustainable location. Furthermore, a deteriorating site will be regenerated, offering space for social interaction and riverside access.

130. Finally, the loss of Bishops Mill will be off-set by an energy generating

Archimedes Screw that will provide much of the energy required by this development from a renewable source.

The above represents a summary of the comments received on this application. The full written text is available for inspection at the Council offices at County Hall

PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS AND ASSESSMENT

131. Having regard to the requirements of Section 38(6) of the Planning and

Compulsory Purchase Act 2004, the relevant Development Plan policies, relevant guidance and all other material planning considerations, including representations received, it is considered that the main planning issues in this instance relate to the principle of the development of the site for the proposed uses, layout, design and visual amenity and impact on conservation interests, traffic, archaeology, ecology, sustainability, floodrisk and drainage, and other matters raised including the demolition of the existing buildings on the site.

Principle of the development 132. The Freemans Reach site is a sustainable City Centre location where office

development is appropriate as a land use (NPPF Parts 1 and 2, RSS Policies 1, 2, 4, 7, 8 and 9, and Policy EMP12 of the City of Durham Local Plan 2004).

133. The site is not allocated for any specific uses within the Local Plan. However, in

2007 the Durham City Centre Masterplan was produced by Durham City Vision. This identified the Freemans Reach site as a critical development priority. Subsequently, in 2010, a Design Brief was prepared to guide development proposals. The Brief states: ”The opportunity exists to deliver a high quality, mixed use scheme that will be inclusive, accessible and sustainable, sympathetic to its setting, capable of providing socio-economic benefits and significant environmental improvements targeted at pedestrians and cyclists.”

134. Following an invitation to prospective developers, an architectural and bidding

competition took place from which the applicants emerged as preferred developers.

135. The Council’s Regeneration Statement (2012-2022) sets the direction for

regeneration and economic development, with the County Durham Plan one of the key documents intended to deliver it. The Statement sets out five key objectives for regeneration of the County, with a “Thriving Durham City” one of five top priorities. This seeks to exploit the City’s potential as a major retail, business and residential centre, academic hub and visitor destination, and deliver the cultural and tourism ambitions for the City which will benefit the entire County.

136. The emerging policies of the County Durham Plan follow the direction of the

Regeneration Statement by focusing development in Durham City (and other main towns) as a means of raising the economic performance of the City and the County.

137. The Regional Spatial Strategy (RSS) provides the spatial context for the delivery of the RES and in particular RSS Policy 1 seeks to deliver a renaissance across the North East through delivering sustainable and inclusive economic prosperity and growth, whilst conserving, enhancing and capitalising upon the Region’s diverse natural and built environment, heritage and culture. Achieving a balance between these two potentially competing aims lies at the heart of the scheme subject of this report; economic prosperity and growth and capitalising upon its built environment, heritage and culture. Similarly Policies 8 and 32 reflect both the need to conserve the built environment but recognises the opportunities for heritage led regeneration to be used in a constructive way to help bring about social and economic regeneration, and to encourage its potential for business.

138. Accordingly, the regeneration of Freemans Reach, and its use for employment

and leisure purposes is entirely consistent with national, regional and local planning policy.

139. In terms of the demolition of the existing buildings, part 12 of the NPPF deals

with conserving and enhancing the historic environment. Paragraph 136 states; ‘LPA's should not permit the loss of or whole or part of a heritage asset without taking all reasonable steps to ensure the new development will proceed after the loss has occurred’. Whilst the former Ice Rink building at Freemans Reach may not be regarded as a heritage asset itself it does contribute to the significance of the Conservation Area which undoubtedly is a heritage asset, although given that there are clear and firm proposals to replace it the benefits of the proposal are considered to significantly outweigh any harm to any designated heritage asset. The issues regarding the demolition of the Bishops Mill buildings are dealt with separately below.

Layout and Design 140. The applicants have worked closely with the County Council and English

Heritage to design a scheme appropriate to this sensitive location. The building forms respond to a need to step back out of views north from the historic Prebends Bridge which lies to the south of the application site, and step down to the river in a manner traditional to Durham City, reducing the development’s scale. That the scale of the proposed buildings will be higher than that of those currently occupying the site is accepted, and from which no harm is considered to result.

141. The buildings, effectively two urban blocks, are sited to create a strong building

frontage to Freeman's Place and set back from the riverside to create a walkway linking the Penny Ferry Bridge to the south of the site. The riverside walk will create an attractive walkway with areas to sit whilst the buildings provide overlooking and natural surveillance during office hours. The restaurant unit at the southern end of the site would provide activity throughout the day as well as a focal point for the site, alongside the kiosk and energy centre.

142. Unfortunately the flood risk requirements of the site mean that the buildings

must be raised which reduces the potential for the buildings to actively engage with the surrounding spaces. However, the design team has worked hard to enliven the space and provide as active a building edge as is possible within the constraints of the site and the requirements of the future occupier. The layout also provides links to the Walkergate scheme to the east. Whilst the originally proposed bridge link has been removed, the uses on the site are likely to pull pedestrians down to ground level and provide activity along Freeman's Place.

143. The proposed simple palette of materials will help to ground the development

into the Durham townscape in which most buildings are of one single facing material. The use of brickwork is welcomed as the darker colour will sit quietly in the foreground of views towards the World Heritage Site. Through careful specification of bricks and terracotta colour and texture, it is anticipated that an appearance appropriate to the City can be achieved.

144. The buildings that form the two phases of development will be of the same

architectural “family” being within the same architectural style but with subtly different detailing. The extruded oriel windows reflect the Durham oriels found on numerous buildings in the City and the deep reveals to window apertures will provide depth and shadows on thefacades. Strenuous efforts have been made to resolve a roofline that is a most important design element due to its visibility from various elevated positions within the City, and subject to a careful material choice these have been largely successful.

145. The kiosk is now a more exciting proposal than was originally the case, the use

of etched concrete providing interest through art and the story of energy generation on the site to what was once, by necessity due to electrical equipment within, a blank elevation.

146. A Light and Darkness Strategy should ensure that the southern elevation in

particular does not glow in key views at night, competing with the Castle and Cathedral whose recently installed new lighting has been design to take precedence within the City after nightfall.

147. The applicant’s vision for this development is shown in the submitted detailed

plans. This has been carefully considered by the County Council’s Design and Historic Environment and Landscape officers, and subjected to two independent design reviews by NEDRES, The North East Design Review Enablement Service.

148. NRDRES carried out an assessment of the proposed development in order to

secure a totally objective and independent analysis by a design orientated peer group of experts in the fields of architecture, landscape architecture and urban design.

149. Part of the Design Council, and hosted by a partnership between the Royal

Institute of British Architects (RIBA) and Northern Architecture, the objectives of NEDRES are to provide impartial design advice, help raise design aspirations, and encourage the adoption of more consistent design standards across the North East of England.

150. The panel agreed there is 'much to like' on the scheme. The effort put into the

brief can be seen in the development and outcome of the design. The Panel agreed that the architectural response seems comfortable and composition, massing and site organisation work well. The initial reaction of the Panel was that massing and the disposition of masses across the site are good but more thought needs to given to public space.

151. The Panel commented that the urban design analysis is well conceived and the

position of the proposal to the neighbouring developments is convincing. The high level bridge link across Freeman’s Place from the adjacent development would bring further value to the scheme. The panel are pleased to hear that there is a positive dialogue between developers over this potential link. The

panel were also encouraged that contact has been made with schemes over the river to develop their integration with the proposal. A coherent design approach with neighbouring buildings will improve the integration of the scheme with the surrounding area.

152. Overall the panel were impressed by the positive partnership between the

design team and developer and believe this can be seen in the design solution. 153. In view the positive impacts described above in terms of both its urban design

impact and relationship to its surroundings it is considered that this proposal both preserves and enhances the character and appearance of the Durham (City Centre) Conservation Area, and would cause no harm to the setting or Outstanding Universal Value of the Durham Castle and Cathedral World Heritage Site.

154. Concerns expressed by the City of Durham Trust have been taken fully into

account, and indeed discussed with both English Heritage and the applicants’ architect. However, concerns raised regarding the massing, architecture, details of layout and materials must be balanced by the positivity received from English Heritage, NEDRES, and the Council’s design advisors and the absence of adverse comment from other quarters. It has therefore been concluded that the objectives of NPPF Parts 7 and 12, Policy 8 of the RSS and Policies E3, E6, E21, E22, Q1, Q2, Q4, Q5, Q7, and Q15 of the Local Plan have been satisfied.

Conservation Interests 155. John “Icy” Smith established Durham ice rink on the Freemans Reach site

around 1940 supported by a customer base that included members of the Canadian Air Force stationed locally, some of whom were former professional ice hockey players. After World War II a number made their homes in Durham, and the highly successful Durham Wasps ice hockey team was formed, which justified Smith replacing his original former circus tent with a permanent building. The ice rink closed in 1996, to be replaced the following year by a bowling alley and health and fitness club. This in turn closed in 2006.

156. The existence of Bishop’s Mill was first mentioned in 1183, it being one of eight

medieval mills on the River Wear. The mill had a direct connection with the Durham Prince Bishops as it was proved for the use of the bishop’s tenants to ground their corn. The current building is thought to date from 1784, it having later been adapted to house electrical generating and refrigeration equipment around 1940 to serve the neighbouring ice rink. The building does not contain any of the original mill machinery, gearing or waterwheel, and has fallen into disrepair.

157. Bishop’s Mill is not a listed building. However, it is a Heritage Asset, and a

reminder of when this part of the City was industrialised. The Mill’s removal is necessary for the installation of hydro equipment next to the weir. English Heritage is of the opinion that the Mill’s loss is outweighed by the benefits provided by the Archimedes Screw hydro plant, having applied the test set within par 134 of NPPF Part 12, and substantial weight must be attached to that conclusion. The screw is highly sustainable in providing for much of the overall development’s energy needs, has a synergy with the mill’s original operation and function by acting as a continuation of centuries of energy production on this site,, and will be a visitor attraction, adding to the draw that this

development will bring to an underused and neglected part of Durham’s city centre.

158. In this respect whilst the loss any heritage asset is regrettable, in this case the

overall benefits of the scheme are considered to significantly outweigh any harm to the significance of losing that asset.

Traffic 159. The application site lies in a highly sustainable location with first class

connectivity to other parts of the City and accessibility via a range of transport modes. The findings of the submitted Transport Assessment that traffic predicted to be associated with this proposal is unlikely to lead to conditions prejudicial to highway safety or unacceptable congestion have been accepted, as has the absence of on site parking other than for servicing, and the provision of cycle parking. A Transport Plan would be a condition of any planning approval, the implementation of which will promote sustainable travel. Similarly, a Construction Logistics Strategy, managing construction traffic has been accepted as capable of minimising local impact. Accordingly the objectives of NPPF Part 4, Policies 7 and 54 of the RSS, and Policies T1, T8, T10 and T20 of the Local Plan are considered to have been met.

160. A planning condition relating to coach waiting time at the drop off point is not

considered to be appropriate as this can be addressed under the Highways Act 1980. However, as there is an established coach park immediately to the north it is considered unlikely that coaches would linger at the drop off point. An existing coach lay-by already exists very close by, and this operates satisfactorily under the control of traffic regulations

Archaeology 161. The County Council’s Archaeology Section has had extensive discussions with

the applicant's agents and archaeological contractor with regards to the archaeological reports necessary to support the application. They have carried out and supplied the results of an archaeological desk-based assessment, a field evaluation of the site as well as a level 1 building survey of the ice rink building and a level 3 survey of the former Bishop's Mill. These reports were carried out as per National Planning Policy Framework requirements, the saved policies of the Durham City Local Plan and as per best practice.

162. The archaeology section has accepted all of them as having provided the

appropriate and reasonable amount of information required to help determine the planning application from an archaeological point of view. Additionally, discussions have been held in relation to a proposed mitigation strategy should planning permission be granted for the proposed scheme.

163. In principle the strategy is considered acceptable subject to conditions being

placed on any approval to ensure that full archaeological mitigation is carried out and reported back to the planning authority and potentially published into the wider public domain for "...advancing understanding of the significance of any heritage assets to be lost (wholly or in part) in a manner proportionate to their importance and impact, and to make this evidence (and any archive generated) publicly accessible."

164. This meets the requirements of NPPF para 141 policy 8 of the RSS and policy

E24 of the City of Durham Local Plan.

Ecology 165. There are three bat species recorded using the mill buildings and the mill

tunnel, Common Pipistrelle, Soprano Pipistrelle and Daubenton's bat, all are classified as European protected species and protected under the Habitats & Species Regulations 2010. It is an offence to damage or disturb any bat roost or to obstruct the bat access routes to any roost. Obstruction can be direct such as a physical obstruction or indirect such as a change in the lighting regime or increased disturbance. Of the bat species present Daubenton's bats are by far the most sensitive to change and the species which will require the most mitigation. Key to the mitigation is the re-creation of the mill tunnel which must re-create the physical characteristics of the existing Daubenton's bat roost and the ability for bats to light sample as they fly around in it before emerging. Externally bat flight lines and the correct lighting levels need to be maintained. A key point to note is that the mitigation roosts must be in place a few weeks before the existing roost is demolished.

166. The situation for otter, another European protected species, is similar to bats.

Detailed discussion with the Council’s ecologist, Natural England and the applicant’s ecology consultant has been ongoing and the latest ecological mitigation proposals for dealing with bats, otter and breeding birds are considered much more robust with an adequate timetable for the works and offer a viable methodology for keeping protected species on site. There are still some minor concerns over lighting but if planning permission is granted then it is suggested a condition be imposed requiring compliance with the mitigation strategy and that no works begin until a Natural England development licence is acquired.

167. When determining planning applications where protected species have been

identified, local planning authorities must demonstrate that the decision has been made in the correct manner, particularly that the species has been identified as a protected species and that the LPA has discharged its duty to have regard to the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010 which transpose the requirements of the European Habitats Directive into UK law, and any other relevant legislation such as the Wildlife and Countryside Act. Where there is likely to be a disturbance to protected species, case law has established that local planning authorities must consider whether the applicant might obtain a relevant licence from Natural England. This requires an examination of the derogation provisions which also form the basis of the licensing regime. In this regard, replacement habitat must be justified by there being imperative reasons of a social, economic, public health or safety nature; no satisfactory alternative; and the favourable conservation status of the European Protected Species in their natural range being maintained. The Planning Authority must not usurp the functions of the Licensing body in this regard. It is for Natural England to decide licensing applications; the planning authority must only be satisfied that there is a possibility of a required licence being obtained. However, the economic and social benefits, absence of a satisfactory alternative, and the maintenance of favourable conservation status have in this instance been demonstrated to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority.

168. Natural England has been consulted on the application and has referred the

Council to its standard advice. Appropriate conditions should be attached to any grant of planning permission to ensure any works are carried out in compliance with the mitigation measures specified in the submitted report. The

requirements of part 11 of the NPPF, Policy 8 of the RSS and policy E16 of the City of Durham Local Plan are considered to have been met.

169. Specific objection to the proposed Archimedes Screw has been made by the

Angling Trust and Durham City Angling Club on the grounds of potential harm to fish. It is argued that physical contact with the screw would result in the loss of fish through change of habit in reaches of river from which water is diverted. However, it is the view of the Environment Agency that no harm to fish will result from the proposed Archimedes Screw, and on the contrary, it is said that overall the scheme should result in enhanced fish habitat, recording and monitoring.

Sustainability 170. An integral part of the proposal is the development of a hydro scheme utising an

Archiemedes Screw positioned below the mill race at Bishops Mill. The development of the Archimedean Screw turbine will provide 76% of the predicted energy demand of the development (against a standard benchmark), thereby providing a wholly sustainable and predicable local source of energy which is well in excess of the currently accepted requirement of 10%.

171. The site has been identified as being the most favourable site for Hydro within

the County ,based upon a report produced by Baby Hydro, and its inclusion within the scheme would be compliant with part 10 of the NPPF (paragraph 94), policies 2 nand 3 of the RSS and U15 of the City of Durham Local Plan. Whilst at present there is no requirement to undertake a BREEAM or code for sustainable homes assessment the County Council encourage the use of these environmental assessment schemes to inform sustainable design of developments and it is proposed that the relevant BREEAM and code for sustainable homes is used as a design tool by which sustainable design measures are incorporated in the scheme.

Flood Risk 172. Freemans Reach lies within a flood plain (Environment Agency Flood Risk

Zones 3a and 3b). As required by NPPF Part 10 a sequential and exception test has been carried out by the applicants demonstrating that no alternative site of lower flood risk is available for this development.

173. Following the guidance in the NPPF and in consultation with the Environment

Agency and Council officers a suite of structural and non structural measures has been developed to demonstrate that the development can ensure the safety of the proposed buildings occupants, visitors and neighbours.These include; demonstration that no alternative sites can provide the same regeneration benefits with a lesser flood risk, that the development will not impact on flood levels upstream or downstream, that safe building floor levels are established, that a pragmatic flood mitigation strategy is developed in extreme events, and that mitigation strategy places a duty on the buildings occupants to maintain systems and procedures to ensure continued site safety.

174. This approach has been accepted by the Environment Agency subject to the

imposition of conditions requiring compliance with the submitted Flood Risk assessment mitigation measures and removal of Japanese hogweed from the riverbanks. Accordingly, the objectives of NPPF Part 10, Policy 35 of the RSS, and Policy U10 of the Local Plan are considered to have been satisfied

Other matters

175. No concerns have been raised by the Coal Authority, and no site investigation

works have suggested land stability problems. 176. The developers approach to the protection of air quality is also accepted, and

should planning permission be granted outstanding information concerning HGV levels and piling would be addressed by planning condition.

177. The situation of the site and its relationships to other buildings and particularly

the presence of the nearest residential properties at Walkergate, is such that there are no issues of overlooking or loss of amenity likely to be experienced by occupants of those properties.

178. In terms of regeneration Impact the physical infrastructure of the city centre will

benefit substantially from the removal of the existing building and the introduction of a new development appropriately designed for its historic setting.

179. The use of the first phase of the development to relocate National Savings and

Investments from Milburngate House on the opposite river bank retains important public sector employment in the city. It also offers the potential to begin the release of Milburngate House for development replacing another significantly discordant riverside building.

180. Phase 2 offers further employment opportunities for new or relocating

businesses or public sector organisations. Included in this phase are further leisure opportunities to give life to a new riverside space. The loss of the minor older outbuildings over the weir head is substantially offset by the development of the new Archimedes screw. This creates sustainable energy production, management for the weir head and will act as a visitor attraction in its own right. The new development also will include a new riverside walk and help to encourage the unlocking of further development potential opposite in Walkergate.

CONCLUSION

181. This proposal represents a major investment in County Durham and the

regeneration of a prominent Durham City Centre site, fulfilling key national, regional and local planning policy objectives. The development is highly sustainable, through both its central location the generation and use of renewable energy.

182. The former ice rink and latterly leisure centre and bowling centre building,

occupies a key position relative to the River Wear frontage and Premier Lodge hotel, Walkergate leisure and apartment developments. It has the potential to play a key role in the strategic development of the city centre both physically and in terms of employment provision.

183. The current building is of substantial negative impact due to its immediate

surroundings, the riverside and from views within historic sectors of the city centre, and its demolition and replacement with a more appropriate form of development would therefore positively enhance the character and appearance of the Conservation Area. The outbuildings known as Bishops Mill are the remains of various industrial developments on the site and linked to previous hydro turbine electrical supply for the ice rink.

184. The regeneration context for the current scheme was formed by the previous

Durham City Vision Masterplan now being superseded by the County Durham Plan (CDP).The CDP preferred options stage supports the County wide significance of development in Durham and the City’s central role as an economic driver. A development brief was prepared for the site to guide development proposals and the current application proposal emerged from an architectural and bidding competition.

185. The site is in a prominent and sensitive location and forms part of the view up

river towards the World Heritage Site principal buildings and down river from the historic Prebends and Framwellgate bridges,

186. The physical infrastructure of the city centre will benefit substantially from the

removal of the existing building and the introduction of a new development appropriately designed for its historic setting.

187. The use of the first phase of the development to relocate National Savings and

Investments from Milburngate House on the opposite river bank retains important public sector employment in the city. It also offers the potential to begin the release of Milburngate House for development replacing another significantly discordant riverside buildings.

188. Phase 2 offers further employment opportunities for new or relocating

businesses or public sector organisations. Included in this phase are further leisure opportunities to give life to a new riverside space. The new development also will include a new riverside walk and help to encourage the unlocking of further development potential opposite in Walkergate.

189. The new development offers the opportunity for an exciting, new and distinctive

location for the City, adding to Durham’s existing strengths. The design and massing of the new building is well considered, with the development’s full impact well understood through the submitted visual representations. It is acknowledged that the proposals highest point exceeds that of the existing ice rink shed. However, that is not seen as being a negative feature, and should be evaluated as part of the wider scheme.

190. The loss of the historic Bishops Mill is outweighed by the scheme’s benefits that

include the potential creation and retention of 800 jobs, architecture and built form that will enhance the character and appearance of the Conservation Area and safeguard the World Heritage Site setting within which Freemans Reach lies. The activity and social interaction that enhanced river frontage access, interesting public open space, a restaurant, café and bar, and Archimedes Screw will bring, will add to the wider benefit and vitality and viability of Durham City Centre.

191. Issues of the building layout and design, conservation impacts, traffic,

archaeology ecology, sustainability, ground conditions and air quality have all been carefully assessed in association with specialist advisors and where advised, strategies have been prepared to mitigate any impacts which would be the subject of planning conditions.

192. Careful and thorough consideration has also been given to the two objections

and these have been balanced against specialist professional opinion raised throughout the consideration process. These have been taken into account and addressed in detail within the main body of the report, however on balance

these were not felt to be of sufficient weight to justify refusal of these applications.

RECOMMENDATION

1. That the application CMA/4/90 for Planning permission be APPROVED subject

to the conditions listed below. 2. That the application CMA/4/91 for Conservation Area Consent be APPROVED

subject to the conditions listed below. CMA/4/90

1. The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of three

years from the date of this permission.

Reason: Required to be imposed pursuant to Section 92 of the Planning & Compulsory Purchase Act 2004.

2. The development hereby approved shall be carried out only in accordance with

the approved plans and specifications contained within:

PHASE 1 PROPOSED NORTH ELEVATION PLA(0)20 PHASE 1 PROPOSED EAST ELEVATION PLA(0)21 Rev A PHASE 1 PROPOSED SOUTH ELEVATION PLA(0)22 PHASE 1 PROPOSED WEST ELEVATION PLA(0)23 PHASE 1 SECTIONS PLA/(0)50 PHASE 1 LEVEL 1 PLAN PLA(0)100 PHASE 1 LEVEL 2 PLAN PLA(0)200 PHASE 1 LEVEL 3 PLAN PLA(0)300 PHASE 1 LEVEL 4 PLAN PLA(0)400 PHASE 1 ROOF PLAN PLA/(0)500 PHASE 2 PROPOSED NORTH ELEVATION PLB(0)20 PHASE 2 PROPOSED EAST ELEVATION PLB(0)21 PHASE 2 PROPOSED SOUTH ELEVATION PLB(0)22 PHASE 2 PROPOSED WEST ELEVATION PLB(0)23 PHASE 2 NORTH/SOUTH SECTION PLB(0)51 PHASE 2 EAST/WEST SECTION PLB(0)24 PHASE 2 LEVEL 1 PLAN PLB(0)100 PHASE 2 LEVEL 2 PLAN PLB(0)200 PHASE 2 LEVEL 3 PLAN PLB(0)300 PHASE 2 LEVEL 4 PLAN PLB(0)400 PHASE 2 LEVEL 5 PLAN PLB(0)500 PHASE 2 ROOF PLAN PLB(0)600 PROPOSED ELEVATIONS TO RIVER WEAR & FREEMAND PLACE L(9)21RevA PROPOSED NORTH SOUTH SECTIONS PL(9)51Rev A PROPOSED EAST WEST SECTIONS PL(9)52 Rev A HYDRO PLANS SECTIONS AND ELEVATIONS PL(9)200 Rev A KIOSK PLANS & ELEVATIONS PL(9)100 Rev A RIVER EDGE PROPOSALS PL(92)52 LANDSCAPE MASTERPLAN 11115001_100 Rev D LANDSCAPE PAVING MATERIALS KEY PLAN 11115001_102 Rev D LANDSCAPE VERTICAL WALL FINISHES KEY PLAN 11115001_103 Rev E LANDSCAPE EXISTING TREES REMOVAL & RETENTION PLAN 11115001_104 Rev D

LANDSCAPE BALLUSTRADES & HANDRAILS KEY PLAN 11115001_105 Rev D LANDSCAPE PUBLIC SQUARE GA 11115001_200 Rev C LANDSCAPE PUBLIC SQUARE LONG SECTIONS 11115001_201 Rev C LANDSCAPE TYPICAL RIVER EDGE SECTIONS 11115001_203 Rev B LANDSCAPE TYPICAL SITE WALL SECTIONS 1115001_204 Rev C LANDSCAPE SOFT LANDSCAPE PROPOSALS PLAN 11115001_300 Rev C SCOPE OF WORKS PLAN AL(99)500 PHASING PLAN AL(0)1010

Reason:To meet the objectives of Policies E3, E6, E21, Q1, Q4, Q7, Q15, T10, T20, U8a, U14, and U15 of the City of Durham Local Plan 2004.

3. The development hereby permitted shall only be carried out in accordance with

the approved Flood Risk Assessment (FRA) by WSP, undertaken for Maple Oak Ltd and dated 15 February 2013, and the following mitigation measures detailed within the FRA:

a) Limiting the surface water run-off generated by the site to a maximum of

60l/s so that it will not exceed the run-off from the undeveloped site and not increase the risk of flooding off-site.

b) Identification and provision of safe route(s) into and out of the site to an appropriate safe haven.

c) Finished floor levels are set no lower than Phase 1 - 33.4mAOD; Phase 2 - 33.2mAOD; Kiosk - 33.2mAOD; Substation - 33.4mAOD.

d) Install and maintain a flood warning system to inform the decision making procedures on the onset of flooding.

e) Flood resilient construction methods are utilised in the buildings materials. f) Flood warning signage and directions are placed within strategic locations

as agreed with the Local Planning Authority. g) The mitigation measures shall be fully implemented prior to any use of the

buildings and subsequently in accordance with the timing / phasing arrangements embodied within the scheme, or within any other period as may subsequently be agreed, in writing, by the local planning authority.

Reason

a) To prevent flooding by ensuring the satisfactory storage of/disposal of

surface water from the site. b) To ensure safe access and egress from and to the site.

c) To reduce the risk of flooding to the proposed development and future occupants.

d) To ensure a timely exit from the site on the onset of flooding. e) To reduce the impact of flooding on the proposed development.

f) To ensure that all users, including visitors to the site are aware of the risk of flooding.

g) To meet the objectives of Policy U8a and U10 of the City of Durham Local Plan.

4. No development shall take place until a detailed method statement setting out

site specific eradication and control strategies and identifying plans for the long-term management / control of Japanese Knotweed, Giant Hogweed and Himalayan Balsam on the site has been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The method statement shall include proposed measures that will be used to prevent the spread of these species during construction works. It shall also contain measures to ensure that any soils

brought to the site are free of the seeds / root / stem of any invasive plant covered under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981, as amended. Development shall only be carried out in accordance with the approved method statement.

Reason: This condition is necessary to prevent the spread of Japanese Knotweed, Giant Hogweed and Himalayan Balsam, which are invasive species. Without it, avoidable damage could be caused to the nature conservation value of the site contrary to national planning policy as set out in the National Planning Policy Framework paragraph 109, which requires the planning system to aim to conserve and enhance the natural and local environment by minimising impacts on biodiversity and providing net gains in biodiversity where possible. The submitted Environmental Statement recognises that appropriate eradication, control and monitoring are required otherwise the species could result in a moderate adverse effect of local significance. This condition meets the objectives of Policy E16 of the City of Durham Local Plan.

5 No development shall take place until the applicant, or their agents or

successors in title, has secured the implementation of a programme of archaeological work in accordance with a written scheme of investigation (WSI), to include all the items set out in section 6.7.1 - 6.7.5 of the "Former Ice Rink Freeman's Reach, Durham: Environmental Statement" prepared by Chris Blandford Associates dated November 2012 and submitted in support of the planning application. The WSI must be submitted by the applicant and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall then be carried out in full accordance with the approved details.

Reason: To meet the objectives of Policies E6, E21, E22 and E24 of the City of Durham Local Plan and paragraph 135 of the NPPF.

6 Prior to the development being beneficially occupied, a copy of any analysis,

reporting, publication or archiving required as part of the mitigation strategy shall be deposited at the County Durham Historic Environment Record. This may include full analysis and final publication. Reporting and publication must be within one year of the date of completion of the development hereby approved by this permission

Reason :To meet the objectives of Policies E21 and 24 of the City of Durham Local Plan and paragraph 141 of the NPPF, by ensuring the developer records and advances understanding of the significance of the heritage asset to be lost (wholly or in part) in a manner proportionate to its importance and the impact, and to make this evidence (and any archive generated) publicly accessible.Notwithstanding the information shown on the submitted application details of all materials to be used externally and the standard of their finish shall be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority in writing before the development is commenced, and thereafter implemented in accordance with the approved scheme.

7 Notwithstanding the information shown on the submitted application details of all materials to be used externally and the standard of their finish shall be

submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority in writing before built development is commenced, and thereafter implemented in accordance with the approved scheme.

Reason :To meet the objectives of Policies E6 and Q7 of the City of Durham Local Plan 2004.

8 No development shall commence until a detailed landscaping scheme has been

submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.No tree shall be felled or hedge removed until the landscape scheme, including any replacement tree and hedge planting, is approved as above. Any submitted scheme must be shown to comply with legislation protecting nesting birds and roosting bats. The landscape scheme shall include accurate plan based details of the following: - Trees, hedges and shrubs scheduled for retention. - Details of hard and soft landscaping including planting species, sizes, layout, densities, numbers. - Details of planting procedures or specification. - Finished topsoil levels and depths. - Details of temporary topsoil and subsoil storage provision. - Seeded or turf areas, habitat creation areas and details etc. Details of land and surface drainage. - The establishment maintenance regime, including watering, rabbit protection, tree stakes, guards etc. The local planning authority shall be notified in advance of the start on site date and the completion date of all external works. Trees, hedges and shrubs shall not be removed without agreement within five years.

Reason :To meet the objectives of Policy Q5 of the City of Durham Local Plan

2004 9 All planting, seeding or turfing and habitat creation in the approved details of

the landscaping scheme shall be carried out in the first available planting season following the practical completion of the development. No tree shall be felled or hedge removed until the removal/felling is shown to comply with legislation protecting nesting birds and roosting bats. Any approved replacement tree or hedge planting shall be carried out within 12 months of felling and removals of existing trees and hedges. Any trees or plants which die, fail to flourish or are removed within a period of 5 years from the substantial completion of the development shall be replaced in the next planting season with others of similar size and species. Replacements will be subject to the same conditions.

Reason :To meet the objectives of Policy Q5 of the City of Durham Local Plan

2004 10 Prior to the construction of the kiosk, details of the artistic elevation element

shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Local Planning Authority. Thereafter the work shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.

Reason :To meet the objectives of Policy Q15 of the City of Durham Local Plan

2004. 11 Prior to any occupation of the approved development an external and internal

lighting strategy shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Local

Planning Authority. Thereafter implementation shall take place in accordance with the approved details.

Reason:To meet the objectives of Policies E3, E6 and E21 of the City of

Durham Local Plan 2004. 12 No development shall take place unless in accordance with the mitigation

detailed in the submitted Ecological Mitigation Strategy (February 2013 Ref: 11115002R Eco Mitigation Proposals_Clarifications_BW_02) .

Reason:To meet the objectives of Policy E16 of the City of Durham Local Plan

2004. 13 No development shall take place unless in accordance with the submitted

Freemans Reach, Durham Travel Plan (Maple Oak Ltd November 2012). Reason :To meet the objectives of Policy T1 of the City of Durham Local Plan

2004. 14 No development shall take place unless in accordance the terms of the

submitted Freemans Reach, Durham Construction Logistics Plan (Maple Oak Ltd November 2012).

Reason :To meet the objectives of Policy T1 of the City of Durham Local Plan

(2004) 15 Prior to any occupation of the approved development details of a cycle route,

paving at stair heads, loading bays and Freemans Place surface changes shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Local Planning Authority. Thereafter implementation shall take place in accordance with the approved details.

Reason :To meet the objectives of Policies Q1, Q2, Q4, Q5 and T20 of the City

of Durham Local Plan 2004 16 Prior to development commencing details of all proposed piling and HGV traffic

movements during the construction phase shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Local Planning Authority. Thereafter implementation shall take place in accordance with the approved details.

Reason :To meet the objectives of Policy Q1 of the City of Durham Local Plan

2004. CMA/91/CAC

1 The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of

three years from the date of this permission.

Reason: Required to be imposed pursuant to Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 as amended by the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004

2 The development hereby approved shall be carried out only in accordance with the approved plans and specifications contained within:

• SITE LOCATION PLAN WITH BUILDINGS FOR DEMOLITION PL(9)1251

Reason:To meet the objectives of Policies E3, E6, E21, Q1, Q4, Q7, Q15, T10, T20, U8a, U14, and U15 of the City of Durham Local Plan 2004.

REASONS FOR THE RECOMMENDATION

I. The proposed development, which comprises office and leisure uses,

associated infrastructure and landscaped open space, and an Archimedes Screw energy generating turbine, is a highly sustainable form of development by virtue of its city centre location and energy efficiency. The submitted scheme will regenerate a neglected and prominent site; both retain and create jobs within Durham; and is of a scale, massing and architectural quality that will enhance the character and appearance of the Durham (City Centre) Conservation Area without adversely impacting upon the Durham Castle and Cathedral World Heritage Site.

II. The demolition of the former Ice Rink Building the Bishop’s Mill is considered to

be conclusively outweighed by the development’s overall and wide ranging benefits and these proposals are considered to be fully compliant with key Government objectives as contained within the National Planning Policy Framework parts 1, 2, 4, 7, 8, 10, 11, and 12, and to meet the objectives of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990.

III. The proposals have taken full account of the site’s prominent, central and

historic setting, and include mitigation measures that effectively address flood risk, traffic generation, and ecological, archaeological and construction phase impact. They are therefore considered to comply with Policies E3, E6, E16, E21, E24, EMP12, Q1, Q4, Q5, Q7, T1, T10, T20, U8A, U14 and U15 of the City of Durham Local Plan 2004; and Policies 1, 2, 3, 4, 7, 8, 9, 24, 35, 38, 39, and 54 of the RSS.

IV. Concerns regarding the proposal’s scale and massing, and the Archimedes

Screw’s potential impact upon fish in the River Wear have been taken fully into account, and due weight given to the counter views offered by specialist internal and external consultees. On balance it has been concluded that the evidence in favour of this proposal by far outweighs that against, and that the overall benefits resulting from the proposed development, aesthetically and economically, by far outweigh any perceived disbenefits.

STATEMENT OF PROACTIVE ENGAGEMENT

The Local Planning Authority in arriving at its decision to support this

application has, without prejudice to a fair and objective assessment of the

proposals, issues raised, and representations received, sought to work with the

applicant in a positive and proactive manner with the objective of delivering

high quality sustainable development to improve the economic, social and

environmental conditions of the area in accordance with the NPPF. (Statement

in accordance with Article 31(1) (CC) of the Town and Country Planning

(Development Management Procedure) (England) (Amendment No. 2) Order

2012.)

BACKGROUND PAPERS

� Submitted application form, plans, supporting documents and subsequent

information submitted by the applicant. � Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 � National Planning Policy Framework (2012) � North East of England Plan Regional Spatial Strategy to 2021 (RSS) July 2008 � City of Durham Local Plan 2004 � Durham County Council Regeneration Statement (2012-2022) � Durham City Vision Masterplan 2007 � Town and Country Planning (Consultation) (England) Direction 2009 � Statutory, internal and public consultation responses.

Planning Services

CMA/4/90

Office development and associated restaurant and cafes, information kiosk, Archimedes Screw and

public realm works

This map is based upon Ordnance Survey material with the permission o Ordnance Survey on behalf of Her majesty’s

Stationary Office © Crown copyright. Unauthorised reproduction infringes Crown copyright and

may lead to prosecution or civil proceeding. Durham County Council Licence No. 100022202 2005

Comments

Date March 2013 1:1250