DOCSLIB.ORG

County Planning Committee Date Tuesday 17 June 2014 Time 2.00

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

County Planning Committee

  • Date
  • Tuesday 17 June 2014

Time Venue
2.00 pm Council Chamber, County Hall, Durham

Business Part A

1. 2. 3. 4. 5.
Apologies for Absence Substitute Members Declarations of Interest Minutes of the meeting held on 1 April 2014 (Pages 1 - 16) Applications to be determined a) CMA/4/107 - Land at Field House Farm to the south of Robin
Lane, to the south east of West Rainton, north of Low Pittington and west of High Moorsley (Pages 17 - 112)

Field House surface mine scheme involving surface mining operations for the winning and working of 514,000 tonnes of coal and up to 83,000 tonnes of fireclay, ancillary site operations with progressive restoration and aftercare to agriculture, broadleaved woodland, hedgerows, water bodies, wetland and low nutrient grassland over a 3 year period.

b) CMA/4/112 - Land south west of Station Road, West Rainton
(Pages 113 - 158)

Residential development of up to 150 dwellings, small scale community hub comprising use classes A1 and/or A2, A3, A4 and A5 of up to 950sq.m. and use class D1 of up to 950 sq.m. with open space, hard and soft landscaping, associated infrastructure and off site highway improvements (outline, all matters reserved except access).

c) DM/14/00920/FPA - Wolsingham School and Community College,
Leazes Lane, Wolsingham, Durham, DL13 3DN (Pages 159 - 182) Proposed extension to the Wolsingham lower school building, part demolition of existing classroom block to the rear, and associated landscaping.

d) DM/14/00761/FPA - The Meadows School, Whitworth Road,
Spennymoor (Pages 183 - 200)

Erection of school extension, associated external works, and demolition of demountable classrooms.

e) DM/14/00762/FPA - North Durham Academy (West Campus),
Blackett School, Annfield Plain. (Pages 201 - 218)

Reuse of Greencroft Community School to provide a new school facility for Harelaw Special School. Partial demolition of existing building, erection of roof infill to existing courtyard area, external alterations and associated landscaping.

6.

7.
Such other business as, in the opinion of the Chairman of the meeting, is of sufficient urgency to warrant consideration

Any resolution relating to the exclusion of the public during the discussion of items containing exempt information

PART B

  • 8.
  • Such other business as, in the opinion of the Chairman of the meeting,

is of sufficient urgency to warrant consideration

Colette Longbottom

Head of Legal and Democratic Services
County Hall Durham 9 June 2014

To:

The Members of the County Planning Committee

Councillor K Davidson (Chairman) Councillor B Moir (Vice-Chairman)

Councillors J Allen, B Armstrong, D Boyes, M Dixon, D Hall, G Holland, A Laing, R Lumsdon, C Marshall, H Nicholson, G Richardson, A Shield, P Taylor and R Young

  • Contact: Ian Croft
  • Tel: 03000 269702

Agenda Item 4

DURHAM COUNTY COUNCIL

At a Meeting of County Planning Committee held in Council Chamber, County Hall,

Durham on Tuesday 1 April 2014 at 2.00 pm Present:
Councillor K Davidson (Chairman)

Members of the Committee:

Councillors J Allen, B Armstrong, D Boyes, M Dixon, D Hall, G Holland, A Laing, R Lumsdon, C Marshall, B Moir (Vice-Chairman), A Shield and R Young

Also Present:

Councillor(s) J Charlton, R Crute, C Kay, L Pounder, D Stoker, C Wilson and R Yorke

  • 1
  • Apologies for absence

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors J Buckham, G Richardson and P Taylor.

23
Substitute Members

There were no substitute Members in attendance.

Declarations of Interest

Councillor D Boyes declared an interest in Agenda Item 5 (b) - CE/13/01542/FPA - East Durham College, Houghall Campus, Houghall, Durham, DH1 3SG as a Governor of East Durham College and withdrew from the meeting during the consideration of this item.

  • 4
  • Minutes

The minutes of the meeting held on 4 March 2014 were agreed as a correct record and signed by the Chairman, subject to the inclusion of the following under Minute 5a:

Councillor A Shield expressed concern at the effects of the proposed development on infrastructure in the area, particularly the highways network.

  • 5
  • Applications to be determined

  • 5a
  • CE/13/01660/FPA - Land to north of Castle Eden Brewery, Castle Eden,

Durham

Page 1

The Committee considered a report of the Senior Planning Officer regarding an application to erect a crematorium with upgraded access and associated works on land to the north of Castle Eden Brewery, Castle Eden, Durham (for copy see file of Minutes).

P Herbert, Senior Planning Officer, provided the Committee with a detailed presentation which included photographs of the site and a plan of the proposed layout. Members of the Committee had visited the site the previous day and were familiar with the location and setting.

The Senior Planning Officer referred to paragraph 100 of the report and informed the Committee that the figure for vehicle movements should read 136 movements in each direction per day, and not per week as printed. He added that since the writing of the report, a 68-signature petition of objection had been received from Castle Eden Golf Club, as well as 4 additional letters of objection from local residents.

Councillor Crute, local Member, addressed the Committee to object to the application. The local community of Castle Eden was opposed to the proposal, which had not received a single letter of support. A Planning Consultant engaged by residents of Castle Eden’s had identified a number of discrepancies in the report, yet the report of the Consultant had not been published, and many representations which opposed the development had not been published on the Planning Portal.

Councillor Crute referred to traffic generation which would arise from the proposal. The application placed an emphasis on average attendances at the proposed crematorium but made no mention of the possible impact on traffic flow on the Trunk Road A19 of larger funerals, of which there had been two recent examples. The proposal would bring with it an increased volume of traffic into Castle Eden which would impact on road safety within the village. There was insufficient car parking on the site of the crematorium to accommodate traffic for a larger funeral, and local businesses had expressed concern that in such an event, people may use their car parks while attending services.

The proposed site for the crematorium was an unsuitable location in an area which had been identified as being of high landscape value, with the Campaign to Protect Rural England expressing caution around developing the site. Castle Eden Golf Club fairways ran to the north and east of the site and there was concern that golfers would pass within close proximity of the crematorium chimney which may release toxins. The proximity of the golf course would, inevitably, also result in stray golf balls being hit into the crematorium area, which could cause injury to people and damage to property. To address this risk, trees or netting to the height of 100 to 150 feet would be required, which would impact on visual amenity and also be a risk to birds.

Councillor Crute referred to anti-social behaviour which had previously taken place on a lane, part of which was the proposed access road to the crematorium. The anti-social behaviour had necessitated the issuing of an emergency Order to prohibit traffic on the lane and a barrier had been erected to prevent such access. Since the issuing of the Order, the anti-social behaviour had reduced/been

Page 2

eliminated. Residents were fearful that if part of this lane was to be used as access to the proposed crematorium, and traffic once again allowed access to it, such antisocial behaviour would re-occur.

Councillor Crute informed the Committee that views of Planning Policy had been distorted in the report. Referring to paragraph 69 of the report, he informed the Committee that NPPF did not indicate that Local Plans carried little weight. He added that although a regular bus service had been mentioned in the report, there was in fact only one bus per hour through Castle Eden in each direction. The District of Easington Local Plan identified Castle Eden as a dormitory settlement, and saved Policy 7 within the Plan protected areas of high landscape value from development unless no alternative sites could be identified. Eleven such alternative sites for this application had been identified, and this site had been chosen by the applicant to increase their profit margin.

Councillor Pounder, local Member, addressed the Committee to object to the application. The key issues of concern were the impact on local residents and families if the access lane was re-opened and the previous anti-social behaviour reoccurred, concerns regarding injuries from stray golf balls on to the site and concerns about possible toxic emissions from the crematorium chimney. The application could be refused on the grounds of it breaching Policies within the District of Easington Local Plan, traffic generation, ecology, public safety from the nearby golf club and the return of anti-social behaviour on the access lane.

Councillor B Turnbull, Castle Eden Parish Council, addressed the Committee to object to the application. The proposed access lane had caused many problems of anti-social behaviour prior to it being closed to traffic. Prior to this taking place, street lighting and CCTV had been suggested to address the anti-social behaviour, but this was rejected as not being a suitable option because of the nature of the behaviour. There were already high traffic flows in the area, and although the road into Castle Eden was subject to a 40 m.p.h. restriction, traffic surveys showed that half the vehicles on the road exceeded this restriction, with 20% exceeding 46 m.p.h. Highways officers recommended a maximum splay speed of 42 m.p.h. for junctions. A planning consultant report which had been commissioned analysed alternative sites for the proposed facility and had concluded that the applicant’s assessment of this site was heavily flawed and biased towards this site. The consultant had analysed 30 alternative sites, with 12 being assessed as being suitable using the applicant’s criteria. Of these 12 sites, Castle Eden was shown as being 12th; therefore 11 sites were more suitable. This application was contrary to Policies 1,3,7,14,15,17 and 18 contained in the District of Easington Local Plan and there were a significant number of more suitable, alternative sites nearby.

Mr P Barclay, local resident, addressed the Committee to object to the application. He referred to incidents of nocturnal anti-social behaviour which had previously taken place on the lane, part of which was now proposed for access to the development site, and also to incidents of sexual exhibitionism which had taken place on the lane. As a result of the nature and level of previous anti-social behaviour the Council had taken the unusual step of using emergency powers to prohibit traffic from this lane. This application included opening part of the lane for access and moving the barrier for traffic some 240m along the lane, and it was

Page 3

feared such anti-social behaviour would return to the area. If part of the lane was re-opened. Mr Barclay also expressed concern at the health and safety issue regarding the proximity of the proposed crematorium to the Castle Eden Golf Club and associated hazard from golf balls.

Mr A Lathbury of Dignity plc addressed the Committee in support of the application. Dignity plc was the largest bereavement service in the United Kingdom and also the most experienced operator of crematoria in the United Kingdom. The majority of funeral services now took place at crematoria, with 425,000 cremations taking place in the United Kingdom last year. A crematorium needed to be both a place where a cremation could take place and also a place of worship to which people could return to pay their respect. New crematoria were designed to meet these needs. Dignity had crematoria in areas such as Hartlepool and Sunderland which were surrounded by residential houses without any impact on the environment.

The demand for crematoria was increasing due to an increased lack of cemetery space and an increase in choice for cremations, which had risen from 60% to 74%. The age profile in the United Kingdom also showed that an increase in the death rate was predicted.

A crematorium was a greater use of land when compared to a cemetery and it was estimated that the proposed crematorium would serve surrounding population of approximately 100,000 people, with 750 cremations taking place on site each year. The proposed crematorium would offer 1 hour service times and services would take place Monday to Friday 9 a.m. to 5 p.m. It would charge a single fee for services and would conform to the latest disability access requirements. Sensor lighting would be installed in the grounds of the crematorium and the site and entrance would be covered by CCTV cameras.

Dignity plc acted to meet and exceed environmental requirements, and its Wyre Forest crematorium had recently been awarded a Green Apple Award. Cremators at the proposed site would be fully mercury abated and would require an annual licence from an Environmental Health Officer to operate.

The proposed crematorium would create 3 fte jobs on site, with extra grounds workers in the second year of operation. Additionally, local restaurants, caterers and florists would benefit from extra business.

The Senior Planning Officer addressed the Committee to clarify some of the points raised. He referred the Committee to a recent appeal decision in Cheshire where an application for a crematorium had been refused, but allowed on appeal, in which the Inspector had concluded that the NNPF referred presumption in favour of sustainable development and added that each application should be considered on its own merits. The Senior Planning Officer apologised for the omission of publishing some information on the Planning Portal but added that the information needed when making a recommendation on the application.

Referring to traffic, the Senior Planning Officer informed the Committee that the crematorium would carry out a maximum of 8 services a day, with an average of 17

Page 4

cars per service and this average number of cars had been accepted by Planning Inspectors.

Advice had been taken from landscape consultants who had concluded that the proposed development would have a low impact in an area of high landscape value.

Referring to environmental issues, both Natural England and Health and Safety had examined the application, which would be mercury neutral, and considered that there may be an increase in nitrogen levels due to increased traffic flows. However, dispersion models had been used and had concluded that on the balance of probabilities the proposed crematorium would have no impact on the surrounding area. Green netting had been used on various golf courses and the onus was on the applicant to address the issue of possible stray golf balls.

The Senior Planning Officer informed the Committee that he had spoken to the traffic management officer in the Specialist Operations Unit of the police who thought that anti-social behaviour was unlikely to return to the area as a result of the proposed development because the road to be used would be of a more open aspect and a barrier would still be in place on the more secluded parts of the lane.

Councillor Marshall sought clarification on why the Committee was being advised not to give weight to parts of the District of Easington Local Plan and to give weight to parts of the emerging County Durham Plan. He informed the Committee that he could find no community benefits from this application, which would not create high levels of employment. The proposed development did not fit with the rural nature of Castle Eden and he had concerns regarding increased traffic levels which would be generated and the possibility of anti-social behaviour returning to the lane.

The Senior Planning Officer referred to Policies 3 and 7 of the District of Easington Local Plan. Policy 3 referred to development within the countryside, and this was outlined in paragraph 26 of the report. Paragraph 37 of the report provided details of Policy 35 in the emerging County Durham Plan which was considered relevant to the determination of this application. Policy 7 of the Local Plan referred to protection of Areas of High Landscape Value, however Areas of High Landscape Value were not recognised in NPPF. It was the judgement of landscape colleagues that this application would have no impact on the Area of High Landscape Value.

Councillor Boyes agreed with the concerns raised by Councillor Crute regarding the publishing of information on the Planning Portal. He expressed concern at the increased levels of traffic which would be generated by this proposal. Currently, at peak times, traffic already backed up on the Trunk Road A19 slip road, and traffic wishing to turn right often turned left and entered Castle Eden to perform a U-turn in the bus turning circle. The Senior Planning Officer replied that there would need to be an 80-vehicle queue before traffic backed up on the Trunk Road slip road, adding that there would be a 60 vehicle car park on site and a 35 space overflow car park.

Councillor Dixon informed the Committee that many of the issues raised had not been material planning issues. While agreeing that the Local Plan was 14 years

Page 5

out of date, NPPF Part 8 referred to developments at the detriment to the health and wellbeing of the community. There was no evidence of the need for this development, with projected future death rates being used as an indicator of need.

Councillor Hall agreed with the views of Councillors Marshall and Dixon. NPPF Part 11, the conservation and enhancement of the natural environment also applied to this application. Councillor Hall added that he could see no other reason for the applicant selecting this site other than its proximity to the Trunk Road A19. He had concerns around matters of the impact in an Area of High Landscape Value, visual amenity and traffic issues.

Councillor Shield informed the Committee that 30 alternative sites had been considered, of which 11 were considered preferable to this site. The proposal to control anti-social behaviour on the lane may not be sufficient, and he was not minded to support the application.

In reply to a question from Councillor Laing, the Senior Planning Officer informed the Committee that there had been no letters of support received for the application. Councillor Laing informed the Committee that she regularly used the slip road off the Trunk Road A19 at this location and was aware of the current high levels of traffic at peak times.

Councillor Holland informed the Committee that local objections to the proposal were both unanimous and forceful. The application was contrary to Local Plan Policies 1,14,15,17 and 18 and Local Plans were still adopted by the Council.

Councillor Davidson asked whether Local Plan Policies and NPPF Parts 8 and 11 were sufficient grounds to refuse the application. The Senior Planning Officer replied that he had based his recommendation on evidence measured against up to date Policies. Local Plan Policies were relevant where they aligned with the NPPF and some weight must be given to the emerging County Durham Plan. L Renaudon, Planning and Development Solicitor requested the Committee to identify how the proposal would conflict with NPPF Part 8. Although NPPF Part 11 referred to a wide range of issues around conserving and enhancing the natural environment, there no professional advice had been received that the application would affect the ecology of the area.

Councillor Dixon referred to the impact on the residential amenity which should be weighed against the demonstration of need for the proposed facility or the economic impact it may bring. Councillor Lumsdon referred to NPPF Part 8, the enjoyment of the area, and considered this application was contrary to this part of the NPPF. Councillor Armstrong referred to NPPF Part 3, supporting a prosperous rural economy, and informed the Committee she did not feel this was relevant to the application, which would only create 2½ jobs.

Moved by Councillor Dixon, Seconded by Councillor Marshall and: Resolved:

That the application be refused on the grounds that the proposed development, by reason of its nature and location, would diminish the levels of amenity that residents

Page 6

of Castle Eden could reasonably expect to enjoy, and would adversely affect the enjoyment of users of the surrounding countryside, contrary to Policies 1 and 3 of the District of Easington Local Plan.

Councillor D Boyes left the meeting.

  • 5b
  • CE/13/01542/FPA - East Durham College, Houghall Campus, Houghall,

Durham, DH1 3SG

The Committee considered a report of the Senior Planning Officer regarding an application for the redevelopment of the main entrance building to provide a new glass lobby and double heighted atrium, erection of animal care centre, animal sheds, equine centre, feed storage and associated facilities at East Durham College, Houghall Campus, Houghall, Durham (for copy see file of Minutes).

A Rawlinson, Senior Planning Officer, provided the Committee with a detailed presentation which included photographs of the site and a plan of the proposed layout. Members of the Committee had visited the site the previous day and were familiar with the location and setting.

The Senior Planning Officer informed the Committee that GCN and badgers surveys were currently being undertaken in line with the advice of the County Ecologist as detailed at Paragraph 63. She reminded the Committee that should it be minded to grant planning permission, it would be necessary for the application to be referred to the Secretary of State as a result of the extent of new floorspace proposed which amounted to inappropriate development in the Green Belt.

Recommended publications
  • Residential Travel Plan Preston Road Longridge April 2018 Prepared

    Residential Travel Plan Preston Road Longridge April 2018 Prepared

    Residential Travel Plan Preston Road Longridge April 2018 Prepared For: Kier Living TPS Project Number: P1112 Project Name: Preston Road, Longridge Date: April 2018 Document Record Project Name P1112_20180416_Preston Road Travel Plan Issue 1 Revision 1 Revision 2 Revision 3 Remarks: Draft Submission Date: 30.11.17 16.04.18 Prepared by: AR GS Checked by: GS GS Authorised by: GS JH Copyright Statement This report is the copyright of TPS Transport Consultants Ltd. The information, ideas and other intellectual property set out in this report and supporting technical appendices are the property of TPS Transport Consultants Ltd and are for the sole benefit of Kier Living in respect of the development proposals for land at Preston Road, Longridge. TPS Transport Consultants Ltd. requires that the information, ideas and other intellectual property set out in this report are: Not shared with third parties and particularly with direct or indirect competitors of TPS Transport Consultants Ltd; Not conveyed to other consultants or personnel without the prior approval of TPS Transport Consultants Ltd; and Not copied in part or in whole. TPS Project Number: P1112 Project Name: Preston Road, Longridge Date: April 2018 Contents Chapter Title Page 1. ................ INTRODUCTION.......................................................................................................................1 Introduction ....................................................................................................................1 Development Proposals ...............................................................................................2
  • NORTHERN TRANS-PENNINE ROUTES STRATEGIC STUDY Stage 1 Report

    NORTHERN TRANS-PENNINE ROUTES STRATEGIC STUDY Stage 1 Report

    NORTHERN TRANS-PENNINE ROUTES STRATEGIC STUDY Stage 1 Report 25/02/2016 Quality Management Issue/revision Issue 1 Revision 1 Revision 2 Revision 3 Revision 4 Remarks First Issue Revision 1 Draft Revision 2 Draft Revision 3 Draft Final Draft Date 18th Dec 2015 12th Jan 2016 8th Feb 2016 9th Feb 2016 25th Feb 2016 Prepared by Richard Jones Richard Jones Richard Jones Richard Jones Richard Jones Checked by Tim Lund Tim Lund Tim Lund Tim Lund Tim Lund Authorised by Helen Murphy Helen Murphy Helen Murphy Helen Murphy Helen Murphy Project number 3511985BQ 3511985BQ 3511985BQ 3511985BQ 3511985BQ Report number NTPR-D2 NTPR-D2 NTPR-D2 NTPR-D2 NTPR-D2 Revision 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 i Northern Trans-Pennine Routes Strategic Study Stage 1 Report 25/02/2016 Client Highways England / Department for Transport Piccadilly Gate Store Street Manchester M1 2WD Lead Consultant WSP | Parsons Brinckerhoff Limited Tel: 01904 615 227 www.wsp-pb.co.uk Registered Address WSP UK Limited 01383511 WSP House, 70 Chancery Lane, London, WC2A 1AF Integrated Delivery Team Contacts Helen Murphy – [email protected] 01904 615 224 Tim Lund – [email protected] 01132 208 236 Richard Jones – [email protected] 01904 615 227 Project number: 3511985BQ Dated: 25/02/2016 ii Table of Contents 1 Introduction and Study Objectives ......................................... 1 1.1 Introduction ............................................................................ 1 1.2 Study Objectives .................................................................... 1 1.3 Study Area ............................................................................. 3 1.4 Study Stages and Programme ............................................... 6 1.5 Stakeholder Reference Group ............................................... 9 1.6 Stage 1 Objectives ................................................................ 9 1.7 Stage 1 Report Structure ......................................................
  • Cicerone-Catalogue.Pdf

    Cicerone-Catalogue.Pdf

    SPRING/SUMMER CATALOGUE 2020 Cover: A steep climb to Marions Peak from Hiking the Overland Track by Warwick Sprawson Photo: ‘The veranda at New Pelion Hut – attractive habitat for shoes and socks’ also from Hiking the Overland Track by Warwick Sprawson 2 | BookSource orders: tel 0845 370 0067 [email protected] Welcome to CICERONE Nearly 400 practical and inspirational guidebooks for hikers, mountaineers, climbers, runners and cyclists Contents The essence of Cicerone ..................4 Austria .................................38 Cicerone guides – unique and special ......5 Eastern Europe ..........................38 Series overview ........................ 6-9 France, Belgium, Luxembourg ............39 Spotlight on new titles Spring 2020 . .10–21 Germany ...............................41 New title summary January – June 2020 . .21 Ireland .................................41 Italy ....................................42 Mediterranean ..........................43 Book listing New Zealand and Australia ...............44 North America ..........................44 British Isles Challenges, South America ..........................44 Collections and Activities ................22 Scandinavia, Iceland and Greenland .......44 Scotland ................................23 Slovenia, Croatia, Montenegro, Albania ....45 Northern England Trails ..................26 Spain and Portugal ......................45 North East England, Yorkshire Dales Switzerland .............................48 and Pennines ...........................27 Japan, Asia
  • Sandside, Special Education Needs School

    Sandside, Special Education Needs School

    Sandside, Special Education Needs School School Travel Plan November 2016 Waterman Infrastructure & Environment Limited Third Floor, South Suite, 8 Nelson Mandela Place, Glasgow G2 1BT www.watermangroup.com Client Name: Cumbria County Council Document Reference: WIE11741-104-R-2-2-1-TP Project Number: WIE11741 Quality Assurance – Approval Status This document has been prepared and checked in accordance with Waterman Group’s IMS (BS EN ISO 9001: 2008, BS EN ISO 14001: 2004 and BS OHSAS 18001:2007) Issue Date Prepared by Checked by Approved by 1 20.10.16 Heather Stevenson Ben Steele Ben Steele Comments 1 20.10.16 Draft for Client Comment 2 22.11.16 Final Comments Disclaimer This report has been prepared by Waterman Infrastructure & Environment Limited, with all reasonable skill, care and diligence within the terms of the Contract with the client, incorporation of our General Terms and Condition of Business and taking account of the resources devoted to us by agreement with the client. We disclaim any responsibility to the client and others in respect of any matters outside the scope of the above. This report is confidential to the client and we accept no responsibility of whatsoever nature to third parties to whom this report, or any part thereof, is made known. Any such party relies on the report at its own risk. Contents 1. Introduction ................................................................................................................................. 1 What is a School Travel Plan? .....................................................................................................
  • In and Around Barrow-In-Furness

    In and Around Barrow-In-Furness

    M o r e c a mb e Bay: nature on your doorstep In and around Barrow-in-Furness Welcome to Barrow -in-Furness where beaches and ancient woodlands meet industry past and present Barrow-in-Furness and the surrounding islands lie at the tip of the Furness Peninsula. The coast In this guide and islands are dotted with rich industrial and you will find... military heritage and wonderful wildlife. The · Seasonal highlights specially protected sand dune habitats here are · Three great days out perfect for rare natterjack toads, claimed to be · How to get around Europe's noisiest amphibian. don’t Miss… There’s so much to see and many on a rainy day… hidden corners to explore, but Pop into Barrow Dock Museum to these top 3 highlights are not to find out more about our maritime be missed! history, call 01229 876400, admission is free. Take shelter in 1 explore secluded beaches one of the hides at South Walney and watch grey seals on the nature reserve (one accessible by Isle of Walney wheelchair) open everyday, call 2 Visit sandscale Haws 01229471066. national nature reserve (nnr), spectacular sand dunes Fascinating fact with dramatic panoramas Look out for bee orchids at 3 Follow the footsteps of Sandscale Haws NNR (May – cistercian monks through June). These orchids mimic a bee natterjack toad ancient woodlands around to encourage bees to pollinate © Dave Talbot the ruins of Furness abbey them. seasonal Highlights This area is full of wildlife, with something spectacular and different to see whatever the time of year: Look out for: sprIng Regal eider ducks arriving at their most southerly breeding site at South Walney and orchids blooming at Sandscale Haws.
  • Stanley AAP Annual Report 2020/21

    Stanley AAP Annual Report 2020/21

    Stanley Area Action Partnership Better for everyone Stanley Area Action Partnership Annual Report 2020/21 Stanley Area Action Partnership Our People Established in 2009 Stanley Area Action Partnership (AAP) is the main engagement mechanism of Durham Our Board is the decision-making body of the AAP. County Council in Stanley to ensure that local residents are engaged with the Council’s policies and have a It is made up of local people, elected councillors and voice in their community. The AAP takes forward neighbourhood issues, works with Partner Organisations to representatives for partner organisations. Our Board shape local service delivery, and develops projects in the local area to address priority issues and links with Members for 2020/21 were. local Elected Members to support them in their community leadership role. Karen Brown (Business Representative) Vice Chair People can get involved in Stanley AAP through the Stanley AAP Forum or by participating in one of our Task Groups. Michael Pearson (Fire and Rescue Service) Inspector Dave Stewart (Police) Nancy Elliott (North Durham Clinical Commissioning Welcome from the Chair Group) Nerise Oldfield-Thompson Helen Fergusson / Martyn Stenson (Durham County Council) March 2020 brought the COVID-19 pandemic to our communities, the changes we had to make to the way we live, work and interact with others has meant those community Suzanne Jobson (Karbon Homes) priorities also had to change. Vacant (Voluntary and Community Sector) Stanley AAP has focused on providing co-ordination and funding to ensure our response to COVID-19 has Alan Tubman / James Black, Co-opted (Stanley Town been delivered in partnership.
  • Stanley Activity and Support Information Directory

    Stanley Activity and Support Information Directory

    Stanley Activity and Support Information Directory Altogether better Durham Spring 2019 Stanley 5th Edition Area Action Partnership www.durham.gov.uk/stanleyaap Welcome to the fifth edition of the Stanley Activity and Support Information Directory There is a wide variety of activities such as Coffee Mornings, Boot Camps, Carpet Bowls, Ladies Clubs, Football Clubs, Men’s Clubs, and much more, which you can get involved in. Information about local organisations that provide support and advice to local residents is also included for your reference. We hope you’ll enjoy the booklet and find an activity that suits you. 2 Altogether better Durham Stanley Area Action Partnership What is an Area Action Partnership? Area Action Partnerships, or AAPs for short, are a way for you to get involved in the work of Durham County Council (DCC), Stanley Town Council, Karbon Homes, Health Service, Durham Police, the Fire & Rescue Service, local businesses and the Voluntary and Community Sector, placing you at the heart of local decision making. There are 14 AAPs throughout County Durham and they work with you to identify and address your local issues and improve the area you live in, its services, its facilities and its appearance. The Priorities for 2019/20 for Stanley AAP are: 4 Stronger Stanley – Children Young People & Families and Community Safety 4 Supporting Stanley – Older People and Health & Wellbeing 4 Successful Stanley – Employment, Enterprise and Training If you would like to come along to our monthly task group meetings or just receive our monthly e-bulletin keeping you up to date with local news, please get in touch.

  • Roudsea Wood and Mosses National Nature Reserve Roudsea Wood in Spring

    Roudsea Wood and Mosses National Nature Reserve Roudsea Wood in Spring Roudsea Wood and Mosses To the east of the woodlands lie the bogs of Roudsea Moss and Holker Moss which have Lying at the head of the Leven Estuary off formed over thousands of years because of Morecambe Bay, Roudsea Wood is one of the very high rainfall of the area. These bogs Britain’s most important woodland sites. have laid down deep peat deposits below Its varied geology, from limestone in the the extensive Sphagnum mosses on the east to slates in the west together with bog surface. areas of alluvial soils and fens, has allowed the development of a rich The NNR entrance is at SD 330827 and mosaic of woodland types. is covered by OS Explorer OL7 map. 1 2 A place for all seasons… Spring On a sunny morning in early spring, you can hear the songs of the many woodland birds like marsh tit and nuthatch, with the wild flight calls of buzzard and raven as they establish their territories. Look out for the territorial sky-dance of the male osprey as he swoops over the bogs of Roudsea Moss with a fish in his talons, all the while uttering his wild call to tell other ospreys that this is HIS territory! In late spring the hazel dormice will be beginning to explore their leafy territories looking for food after so long living on their stored body fats. Osprey Wild daffodils 3 4 Autumn In early autumn, the speckled wood butterfly is at its most abundant and migrant hawker dragonflies can be seen hunting for late-flying insects.
  • A Biodiversty Audit of the North East

    A Biodiversty Audit of the North East

    PREPARED BY NICK BRODIN A BIODIVERSITY AUDIT OF THE NORTH EAST The North East Biodiversity Forum is a partnership of the following organisations: Northumberland Biodiversity Action Plan Steering Group Newcastle Biodiversity Action Plan Steering Group Tees Valley Biodiversity Action Plan Steering Group Durham Biodiversity Partnership North Tyneside Council Biodiversity Action Plan Farming and Wildlife Advisory Group National Farmers Union PREPARED BY NICK BRODIN OCTOBER 2001 A BIODIVERSITY AUDIT OF THE NORTH EAST This document has been produced by English Nature on behalf of the North East Biodiversity Forum Copyright © 2001 North East Biodiversity Forum Text prepared by Nick Brodin/English Nature Project management by Adrian Bury Associates 01937 590541 Designed by Figurehead Printed by Harrogate Printing Limited ISBN 1 85716 558 6 1 CONTENTS List of Tables 4 List of Maps 6 Acknowledgements 7 Foreword by the Prime Minister 17 Preface 18 Introduction 19 About this Audit 23 Habitat Audit Introduction to the Habitat Audit 29 Habitats Part 1: UK BAP priority habitats 1. Woodlands 36 1.1. Upland oak woodland 39 1.2. Upland mixed ashwoods 41 1.3. Wet woodland 43 1.4. Lowland wood pasture and parkland 45 2. Ancient and/or species-rich hedgerows 47 3. Cereal field margins 49 4. Coastal and flood plain grazing marsh 51 5. Meadows 5.1. Lowland meadows 54 5.2. Upland hay meadows 58 6. Calcareous grassland 6.1. Lowland calcareous grassland 61 6.2. Upland calcareous grassland 64 7. Lowland dry acid grasslands 66 8. Heathland 8.1. Lowland heathland 69 8.2. Upland heathland 73 9. Fen, marsh and swamp 9.1.
  • NORTHERN TRANS-PENNINE ROUTES STRATEGIC STUDY Stage 1 Report

    NORTHERN TRANS-PENNINE ROUTES STRATEGIC STUDY Stage 1 Report

    NORTHERN TRANS-PENNINE ROUTES STRATEGIC STUDY Stage 1 Report 25/02/2016 Quality Management Issue/revision Issue 1 Revision 1 Revision 2 Revision 3 Revision 4 Remarks First Issue Revision 1 Draft Revision 2 Draft Revision 3 Draft Final Draft Date 18th Dec 2015 12th Jan 2016 8th Feb 2016 9th Feb 2016 25th Feb 2016 Prepared by Richard Jones Richard Jones Richard Jones Richard Jones Richard Jones Checked by Tim Lund Tim Lund Tim Lund Tim Lund Tim Lund Authorised by Helen Murphy Helen Murphy Helen Murphy Helen Murphy Helen Murphy Project number 3511985BQ 3511985BQ 3511985BQ 3511985BQ 3511985BQ Report number NTPR-D2 NTPR-D2 NTPR-D2 NTPR-D2 NTPR-D2 Revision 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 i Northern Trans-Pennine Routes Strategic Study Stage 1 Report 25/02/2016 Client Highways England / Department for Transport Piccadilly Gate Store Street Manchester M1 2WD Lead Consultant WSP | Parsons Brinckerhoff Limited Tel: 01904 615 227 www.wsp-pb.co.uk Registered Address WSP UK Limited 01383511 WSP House, 70 Chancery Lane, London, WC2A 1AF Integrated Delivery Team Contacts Helen Murphy – [email protected] 01904 615 224 Tim Lund – [email protected] 01132 208 236 Richard Jones – [email protected] 01904 615 227 Project number: 3511985BQ Dated: 25/02/2016 ii Table of Contents 1 Introduction and Study Objectives ......................................... 1 1.1 Introduction ............................................................................ 1 1.2 Study Objectives .................................................................... 1 1.3 Study Area ............................................................................. 3 1.4 Study Stages and Programme ............................................... 6 1.5 Stakeholder Reference Group ............................................... 9 1.6 Stage 1 Objectives ................................................................ 9 1.7 Stage 1 Report Structure ......................................................
  • Grange-Over-Sands Parish Neighbourhood Plan 2015- 2027

    Grange-Over-Sands Parish Neighbourhood Plan 2015- 2027

    Appendix 2 GRANGE-OVER-SANDS TOWN COUNCIL Grange-over-Sands Parish Neighbourhood Plan 2015- 2027 Consultation Statement October 2017 Contents 1 CONSULTATION PROCESS ................................................................... 2 2 KEY RESPONSES FROM CONSULTATION.............................................. 6 3 REGULATION 14 PRE-SUBMISSION CONSULTATION .......................... 7 Appendix A Summary timeline of key engagement activity Appendix B Examples of display material and flyers Appendix C Summary of findings from the Community Survey Appendix D South Lakeland District Council formal screening opinion on the need for an SEA Appendix E Letter/Email to statutory bodies on Pre-Submission Consultation Appendix F List of non-statutory consultees on Pre-Submission Consultation Appendix G Letter/Email to non-statutory consultees on Pre-Submission Consultation Appendix H Summary of comments and responses to Pre-Submission Consultation Appendix I Summary of comments and responses from South Lakeland District Council to Pre-Submission Consultation 1 CONSULTATION PROCESS 1.1 This Consultation Statement has been prepared to fulfil the legal obligations of the Neighbourhood Planning Regulations 2012 (as amended) in respect of the Grange-over-Sands Neighbourhood Plan (GOSNP). 1.2 The legal basis of this Consultation Statement is provided by Section 12(2) of Part 5 of the 2012 Neighbourhood Planning Regulations, which requires that a consultation statement should: • contain details of the persons and bodies who were consulted about the proposed neighbourhood development plan; • explain how they were consulted; • summarise the main issues and concerns raised by the persons consulted; and • describe how these issues and concerns have been considered and where relevant addressed in the proposed neighbourhood development plan. 1.3 The policies contained in the GOSNP are as a result of extensive interaction and consultation with the community and businesses within the parish.
  • Kirkby Moor Wind Farm 5

    Kirkby Moor Wind Farm 5

    SL/2017/0687 PARISH: Kirkby Ireleth Kirkby Moor Windfarm, Kirkby Moor and Lowick High Common PROPOSAL: Variation of condition no 6 attached to planning permission 5/90/2312 (erection of 15 wind turbines and construction of access ways) to vary the temporary time condition to allow retention of turbines until 31 March 2027, followed by one year to carry out decommissioning works APPLICANT: Zephyr Investments Ltd Grid Ref: E: 325250 N: 483500 Gawthwaite Moor Birk Knotts Kirkby Moor Lowick High Common Kirkby Slate Quarries Keldray Moor Spoil Heap Groffa Crag Scars Old Crow Brow Quarry (disused) Lowick High Common Kirkby Moor Hawkswell Bracken Plot Kirkby Moor Cocklakes Winnow s g i g R t n ru B Moor House Breast Long Moor Kirkby Moor Kirkby Moor Gunson Height Osmotherley Moor Horse Head " SL/2017/0687 The material contained in this plot has been reproduced from an Ordnance Survey map with permission of the Controller of Her Majesty's Stationery Office. Kirkby Moor Windfarm Licence o. 100024277 & Crown Copyright Unauthorised reproduction infringes Crown Copyright Kirkby Moor and and may lead to prosecution or civil proceedings Lowick High Common Grizebeck ULVERSTON Scale: Not to scale SUMMARY 1. Planning application made under Section 73 of the Act to vary the end date of planning permission 5/90/2312 from 26 August 2018 to 31 March 2027, with a further year to carry out decommissioning works. The application aims to extend the life of the current permission for a further 8½ years. The main issues arising from the proposal include: • Visual and landscape impact, including cumulative impacts and impacts upon the setting of the Lake District National Park designated as a World Heritage Site.