DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE
Friday, 15 August 2008 10.00 a.m.
Council Chamber, Council Offices, Spennymoor
AGENDA AND REPORTS
Printed on Recycled Paper
DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE Friday, 15 August 2008
AGENDA
1. APOLOGIES
2. DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST To notify the Chairman of any items that appear later in the agenda in which you may have an interest. (Pages 1 - 4)
3. MINUTES To confirm as a correct record the Minutes of the meetings held on 18 th July 2008 (Pages 5 - 10)
4. DEVELOPMENT CONTROL - ADDITIONAL APPLICATIONS To consider any applications which need to be determined as a matter of urgency.
5. CONSULTATIONS FROM DURHAM COUNTY COUNCIL To consider the attached schedule detailing an application which is to be determined by Durham County Council. The view and observations of this Council have been requested. (Pages 11 - 14)
Members are reminded that the applications to be considered under Items 4, and 5 together with the plans submitted and all representations on the applications are available for reference in the relevant files in the Council Chamber, 30 minutes before the meeting or before that in the Development Control Section.
6. DELEGATED DECISIONS A schedule of applications, which have been determined by Officers by virtue of their delegated powers, is attached for information (Pages 15 - 28)
7. APPEALS A schedule of appeals outstanding up to 6 th August 2008 is attached for information. (Pages 29 - 34)
8. RECENT PLANNING APPEAL DECISIONS Report of Director of Neighbourhood Services. (Pages 35 - 58)
EXEMPT INFORMATION The following items are not for publication by virtue of Paragraphs 1 and 6 of Schedule 12 A of the Local Government Act 1972. As such it is envisaged that an appropriate resolution will be passed at the meeting to exclude the press and public.
9. ALLEGED BREACHES OF PLANNING CONTROL To consider the attached schedule of alleged breaches of planning control and action taken. (Pages 59 - 60)
10. UNAUTHORISED SITING OF STEEL CONTAINER NEW CONSERVATORY ROOF AND WOODEN ROOF FOX AND HOUNDS KIRK MERRINGTON Report of Director of Neighbourhood Services. (Pages 61 - 66)
11. UNAUTHORISED DEVELOPMENT AT FORMER COAL STOCKING SITE WESTERTON Report of Director of Neighbourhood Services (Pages 67 - 74)
12. ANY OTHER ITEMS WHICH THE CHAIRMAN DECIDES ARE URGENT Members are respectfully requested to give the Chief Executive Officer notice of items they would wish to raise under the heading not later than 12 noon on the day preceding the meeting, in order that consultation may take place with the Chairman who will determine whether the item will be accepted.
B. Allen Chief Executive
Council Offices SPENNYMOOR
Councillor A. Smith (Chairman) Councillor B. Stephens (Vice Chairman) and
All other Members of the Council
ACCESS TO INFORMATION Any person wishing to exercise the right of inspection in relation to this Agenda and associated papers should contact Liz North 01388 816166 ext 4237 email:enorth@sedgefield.gov.uk
Item 2
Page 1 This page is intentionally left blank
Page 2 Page 3 This page is intentionally left blank
Page 4 Item 3
SEDGEFIELD BOROUGH COUNCIL
DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE
Council Chamber, Council Offfices, Friday, Time: 10.00 a.m. Spennymoor 18 July 2008
Present: Councillor A. Smith (Chairman) and
Councillors W.M. Blenkinsopp, D.R. Brown, V. Chapman, Mrs. K. Conroy, Mrs. P. Crathorne, Mrs. L. M.G. Cuthbertson, A. Gray, G.C. Gray, B. Haigh, Mrs. I. Hewitson, J.G. Huntington, Mrs. H.J. Hutchinson, Ms. I. Jackson, B. Lamb, Mrs. E. Maddison, B.M. Ord and Mrs. E.M. Paylor
Apologies: Councillors Mrs. A.M. Armstrong, B.F. Avery J.P, Mrs. D. Bowman, T. Brimm, J. Burton, D. Chaytor, V. Crosby, D. Farry, T.F. Forrest, P. Gittins J.P., Mrs. B. Graham, Mrs. J. Gray, Mrs. S. Haigh, D.M. Hancock, J.E. Higgin, A. Hodgson, T. Hogan, Mrs. L. Hovvels, G.M.R. Howe, Mrs. S. J. Iveson, J.M. Khan, C. Nelson, D.A. Newell, Mrs. C. Potts, J. Robinson J.P, B. Stephens, K. Thompson, A. Warburton, T. Ward, W. Waters and Mrs E. M. Wood
DC.23/08 DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST The following Declarations of Interest were received :-
Councillor G.C. Gray - Personal and Prejudicial – Item 4 Borough Matters Application No: 2 – Daughter works for applicant Councillor A. Gray - Personal and Prejudicial – Item 4 Borough Matters Application No: 2 – Daughter works for applicant Councillor B. Lamb - Personal and Prejudicial – Item 4 Borough Matters Application No: 2 – Daughter works for applicant Councillor D.R. Brown - Personal and Prejudicial - Item 6 – Consultation from Durham County Council – Member of Durham County Council Councillor Mrs. E.M. - Personal and Prejudicial - Item 6 – Paylor Consultation from Durham County Council – Member of Durham County Council Councillor B.M. Ord - Personal and Prejudicial - Item 6 – Consultation from Durham County Council – Member of Durham County Council
1 Page 5 DC.24/08 MINUTES The Minutes of the meetings held on 20 th June, 2008 and 11 th July, 2008 were confirmed as correct records and signed by the Chairman.
DC.25/08 APPLICATIONS - BOROUGH MATTERS Consideration was given to a schedule of applications for consent to develop (for copy see file of Minutes).
Application No : 1 – Demolition of Existing Warehouse and Erection of New Warehouse. Construction of New Links to, re-roofing and rendering of former Capita Building. Extension and Alteration to existing Loading/Unloading facilities, erection of 2.4 metre high security fence and associated works- PWS Distributors Limited, Aycliffe Business Park – Plan Ref : 7/2008/0166/DM
It was explained that the application sought detailed planning approval for the construction of a new warehouse building, the construction of a link between the new warehouse and the existing building on the site, external works to the existing warehouse to be retained the alteration and extension of the existing loading/unloading facilities new canopy and erection of 2.4 mt. high security fence and associated works.
Following the submission of the revised/reduced scheme officers were recommending approval of the application.
It was noted that since the preparation of the report confirmation had been received from the Environment Agency that, as a result of additional information, they were now withdrawing their earlier objection subject to the addition of the following planning condition :-
No development approved by this permission shall be commenced until the scheme for the provision of surface water drainage had been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The drainage works shall be completed in accordance with the details and timetable agreed.
Reason : To prevent the increased risk of flooding by insuring the provision of a satisfactory means of surface water disposal.
RESOLVED : That the application be approved subject to the conditions detailed in the report and the addition of the following condition :-
No development approved by this permission shall be commenced until a scheme for the provision of surface water drainage works has been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The drainage works shall be completed in accordance with the details and timetable agreed.
2 Page 6 Reason : to prevent the increased risk of flooding by insuring the provision of a satisfactory means of surface water disposal.
Application No : 2 – New External Housing and Compounds Comprising of 1) External Chiller Compound 2) Alteration to Existing Elevations, forming First Floor Double Door Opening and External Landing 3) Altration to Existing Elevation forming 4 No. Louvres, 4) New Nitro Tank 5) 2 No. Substations and Transformers 6) New Loading Bay Enclosure with new Fire Door 7) New Sprinkler Tank and Pumphouse 8) New Loading Bay Canopy 9) New External Housing Arrangement to North Service Yard 10) New Chiller Compound including Biomas Boiler Houseing and Silo 11) Alteration to Existing Elevations to form New Glazed Entrance to Thorn Academy 12) Alteration to Existing Elevations to form new Entrance Canopy 13) Relocation of existing Gatehouse to site entrance and new turning head and small car park 14) External Lighting Scheme – Thorn Lighting and Tridonic ATCO Butchers Race Green Lane Industrial Estate – Plan Ref : 7/2008/0237/DM
NB : In accordance with Section 81 of the Local Government Act 2000 and the Members Code of Conduct Councillors G.C. Gray, B. Lamb and A. Gray declared a personal and prejudicial interest in this application and left the meeting for the duration of the discussion and voting thereon.
It was explained that an application for detailed planning consent for the erection of a new Thorn/Tridonic factory with associated parking landscaping and infrastructure had been granted in October 2006.
Works were already well underway on the site with much of the external framework of the structure now complete. However, in order to meet the fundamental daily requirements of the factory when in operation and in order to achieve its three main functions of manufacture of lighting equipment, retail and development of lighting and light and Thorn Academy to provide teaching training and demonstration of light and lighting, planning consent was now being sought for a number of details which were outlined in the report.
RESOLVED : That the application be approved subject to the conditions outlined in the schedule.
DC.26/08 CONSULTATIONS FROM DURHAM COUNTY COUNCIL
NB : In accordance with Section 81 of the Local Government Act 2000 and the Members Code of Conduct Councillors D. Brown, B.M. Ord and Mrs. E.M. Paylor declared personal interests in this item as Members of Durham County Council and left the meeting for the duration of the discussion and voting thereon.
3 Page 7 Consideration was given to a schedule of applications which were to be considered by Durham County Council and upon which the Council had been invited to comment. (For copy see file of Minutes).
RESOLVED : That the report be received and the recommendations contained therein adopted.
DC.27/08 DELEGATED DECISIONS Consideration was given to a schedule detailing applications which had been determined by officers by virtue of their delegated powers. (For copy see file of Minutes).
RESOLVED : That the schedule be received.
DC.28/08 COUNTY DECISIONS A schedule of applications which had been determined by Durham County Council was submitted for Members information. (For copy see file of Minutes).
RESOLVED : That the schedule be received.
DC.29/08 APPEALS Consideration was given to a schedule of appeals outstanding up to 9 th July, 2008 (for copy see file of Minutes).
RESOLVED : That the schedule be received.
DC.30/08 RECENT PLANNING APPEAL DECISIONS Consideration was given to a report of the Director of Neighbourhood Services in respect of a recent planning appeal decision on land to the north (rear garden) of Garden House, Rushyford.
Members noted that the appeal against a planning decision to refuse outline planning consent for the erection of one detached dwelling with modified access to the access to the A167 and the construction of 2 garages to serve numbers and 1 and 2 Woodham Cottages had been dismissed.
RESOLVED : That the information be received.
EXCLUSION OF PRESS AND PUBLIC
RESOLVED: That in accordance with Section 100(a)(4) of the Local Government Act 1972 the press and public be excluded from the meeting for the following items of business on the grounds that they involve the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in Paragraphs 1 and 6 of Part 1 of Schedule 12a of the Act.
4 Page 8 DC.31/08 ALLEGED BREACHES OF PLANNING CONTROL Consideration was given to a schedule detailing alleged breaches of planning control and action taken (for copy see file of Minutes).
RESOLVED : That the schedule be received.
ACCESS TO INFORMATION Any person wishing to exercise the right of inspection, etc., in relation to these Minutes and associated papers should contact Liz North 01388 816166 ext 4237 email:[email protected]
5 Page 9 This page is intentionally left blank
Page 10 Item 5
SEDGEFIELD BOROUGH COUNCIL
PLANNING APPLICATIONS - COUNTY MATTERS
______1. 7/2008/0343/CM
APPLICATION DATE: 20 June 2008
PROPOSAL: ERECTION OF SHELTER
LOCATION: FISHBURN PRIMARY SCHOOL EAST VIEW FISHBURN CO DURHAM
APPLICANT: Durham County Council Environment , County Hall, Durham, DH1 5UQ
CONSULTATIONS
1. FISHBURN P.C. 2. Cllr. J. Burton 3. Cllr. T. Ward 4. Cllr. D Chaytor 5. BUILDING CONTROL 6. ENGINEERS 7. ENV. HEALTH
______
This application is for development by Durham County Council and will therefore be dealt with by the County Council under Regulation 3 of the Town and Country Planning General Regulations 1992. The views of the Borough Council have been sought upon the proposal as a consultee.
THE PROPOSAL
The proposal involves the construction of a timber, pitched roof shelter comprising round log poles with a timber decked floor within the grounds of Fishburn Primary School, Fishburn.
The shelter would be open sided, with seating on 3 sides, measuring 3600mm by 3600mm, and with a total height of 2400mm. The shelter will be located on an existing lawn area to the west of the school building and be accessed from the adjacent playground via a wooden ramp
Page 11
SEDGEFIELD BOROUGH COUNCIL
PLANNING APPLICATIONS - COUNTY MATTERS
______
The primary purpose of the structure is to provide shelter for pupils during breaks and an area for parents to wait when collecting children. Its aim is to coincide with the schools travel plan to encourage parents to walk to school to collect their children.
Page 12
SEDGEFIELD BOROUGH COUNCIL
PLANNING APPLICATIONS - COUNTY MATTERS
______
CONSULTATION AND PUBLICITY
No adverse comments have been received in response to the consultation exercise for this application, with the Borough Highways and Environmental Health Team, and Fishburn Parish Council having raised no objections to this proposal.
PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS
The shelter is relatively small and has been sympathetically designed to be in keeping with its surroundings. The closest residential property is some 20 metres to the west, with limited views of the structure owing to natural screening along the western school boundary. It is therefore considered that the shelter will have minimal detrimental impact upon the visual amenity of the area or privacy of neighbouring properties.
HUMAN RIGHTS IMPLICATIONS
It is considered that in general terms, the provisions of the Human Rights Act 1998 have been taken into account in dealing with the above application.
SECTION 17 OF THE CRIME AND DISORDER ACT 1998
Officers have considered, with due regard, the likely effect of the proposal on the need to reduce crime and disorder as part of the determination of this application, in accordance with section 17 of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998. In reaching a recommendation to grant planning permission, officers consider that the proposal will not undermine crime prevention or the promotion of community safety.
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the Council raise no objections to the proposal.
______
Page 13 This page is intentionally left blank
Page 14 Item 6
SEDGEFIELD BOROUGH COUNCIL
PLANNING APPLICATIONS - DELEGATED DECISIONS ______
1. 7/2007/0687/DM OFFICER:David Gibson
APPLICATION DATE: 3 June 2008
PROPOSAL: ERECTION OF CONSERVATORY
LOCATION: 30 ASHTREE CLOSE NEWTON AYCLIFFE CO DURHAM
APPLICANT: Mr & Mrs A Archer 30 Ashtree Close, Newton Aycliffe, Co Durham, DL5 4FD
DECISION: STANDARD APPROVAL on 11 July 2008
2. 7/2008/0334/DM OFFICER:Mark O'Sullivan
APPLICATION DATE: 1 July 2008
PROPOSAL: ERECTION OF GAZEBO TO THE REAR (RETROSPECTIVE)
LOCATION: 11 SLEDMORE DRIVE SPENNYMOOR CO DURHAM
APPLICANT: Mr J Rothwell 11 Sledmore Drive, Spennymoor, Co Durham
DECISION: STANDARD APPROVAL on 1 August 2008
3. 7/2008/0333/DM OFFICER:Mark O'Sullivan
APPLICATION DATE: 27 June 2008
PROPOSAL: ERECTION OF CONSERVATORY TO TO THE REAR
LOCATION: 5 THIRLMERE SPENNYMOOR CO DURHAM
APPLICANT: Mr Thomas Dawes 5 Thirlmere , Spennymoor, Co Durham
DECISION: STANDARD APPROVAL on 29 July 2008
Page 15
SEDGEFIELD BOROUGH COUNCIL
PLANNING APPLICATIONS - DELEGATED DECISIONS ______
4. 7/2008/0325/DM OFFICER:Mark O'Sullivan
APPLICATION DATE: 17 June 2008
PROPOSAL: ERECTION OF ADVERTISEMENT HOARDING
LOCATION: GRASS VERGE OUTISDE FORMER BLACK AND DECKER FACTORY SPENNYMOOR CO DURHAM
APPLICANT: CAS Trust c/o Carillion , Hetton Court, 1st Floor The Oval, Hunslet, West Yorkshire, LS10 2AU,
DECISION: STANDARD APPROVAL on 21 July 2008
5. 7/2008/0323/DM OFFICER:David Gibson
APPLICATION DATE: 17 June 2008
PROPOSAL: ERECTION OF CONSERVATORY TO FRONT WITH DISABLED ACCESS RAMP
LOCATION: 24 SANDOWN DRIVE NEWTON AYCLIFFE CO DURHAM
APPLICANT: Mr Stevens 24 Sandown Drive, Newton Aycliffe, Co Durham, DL5 4TA
DECISION: STANDARD APPROVAL on 1 August 2008
6. 7/2008/0322/DM OFFICER:David Gibson
APPLICATION DATE: 24 June 2008
PROPOSAL: ERECTION OF CONSERVATORY TO REAR
LOCATION: 35 KESTREL COURT NEWTON AYCLIFFE CO DURHAM
APPLICANT: Mr Paul Midgley 35 Kestrel Court, Newton Aycliffe, Co Durham, DL5 7GA
DECISION: STANDARD APPROVAL on 24 July 2008
Page 16
SEDGEFIELD BOROUGH COUNCIL
PLANNING APPLICATIONS - DELEGATED DECISIONS ______
7. 7/2008/0318/DM OFFICER:Mark O'Sullivan
APPLICATION DATE: 16 June 2008
PROPOSAL: DISPLAY OF 1 NO. FASCIA SIGN, 1 NO. TOTEM SIGN AND 1 NO. MENU BOARD
LOCATION: CO-OP FOODSTORE OXFORD ROAD SPENNYMOOR CO DURHAM
APPLICANT: CWS Retail Financial Services, Hanover Buildings, P.O. Box 53, New Century House, Manchester , Lancashire
DECISION: WITHDRAWN on 4 August 2008
8. 7/2008/0316/DM OFFICER:Mark O'Sullivan
APPLICATION DATE: 17 June 2008
PROPOSAL: ERECTION OF DETACHED GARAGE TO THE REAR
LOCATION: 25 MOORSIDE CRESCENT FISHBURN CO DURHAM
APPLICANT: Mr L Luke 25 Moorside Crescent, Fishburn, Co Durham
DECISION: STANDARD APPROVAL on 21 July 2008
9. 7/2008/0315/DM OFFICER:Mark O'Sullivan
APPLICATION DATE: 24 June 2008
PROPOSAL: ERECTION OF CONSERVATORY TO THE REAR
LOCATION: 4 MENDIP GREEN CHILTON CO DURHAM
APPLICANT: Mrs Susan Gardner 4 Mendip Green , Chilton , Co Durham
DECISION: STANDARD APPROVAL on 1 August 2008
Page 17
SEDGEFIELD BOROUGH COUNCIL
PLANNING APPLICATIONS - DELEGATED DECISIONS ______
10. 7/2008/0311/DM OFFICER:Mark O'Sullivan
APPLICATION DATE: 16 June 2008
PROPOSAL: ERECTION OF CONSERVATORY TO THE REAR
LOCATION: 16 GLENMERE SPENNYMOOR CO DURHAM
APPLICANT: Mr L Howe 16 Glenmere, Spennymoor, County Durham, DL16 6UR
DECISION: STANDARD APPROVAL on 1 August 2008
11. 7/2008/0309/DM OFFICER:Mark O'Sullivan
APPLICATION DATE: 11 June 2008
PROPOSAL: ERECTION OF TWO STOREY SIDE EXTENSION
LOCATION: 42 OAKDENE ROAD FISHBURN CO DURHAM
APPLICANT: Mrs S Meadows 42 Oakdene Road, Fishburn, Co Durham
DECISION: STANDARD APPROVAL on 18 July 2008
12. 7/2008/0308/DM OFFICER:David Gibson
APPLICATION DATE: 18 June 2008
PROPOSAL: ERECTION OF STORAGE UNIT
LOCATION: ALLOTMENT SITE BUTTERWICK ROAD SEDGEFIELD STOCKTON ON TEES
APPLICANT: Mr P Simcock Sedgefield Allotment Society, 30 Wellgarth Mews, Sedgefield, Stockton on Tees, TS21 3NN
DECISION: STANDARD APPROVAL on 1 August 2008
Page 18
SEDGEFIELD BOROUGH COUNCIL
PLANNING APPLICATIONS - DELEGATED DECISIONS ______
13. 7/2008/0302/DM OFFICER:Mark O'Sullivan
APPLICATION DATE: 10 June 2008
PROPOSAL: ERECTION OF CONSERVATORY TO THE REAR
LOCATION: 18 GRASMERE SPENNYMOOR CO DURHAM
APPLICANT: Mr Colin Jewitt 18 Grasmere, Spennymoor, Co Durham
DECISION: STANDARD APPROVAL on 18 July 2008
14. 7/2008/0300/DM OFFICER:Mark O'Sullivan
APPLICATION DATE: 5 June 2008
PROPOSAL: PROPOSED NEW SHOP FRONT INCLUDING NEW AUTOMATIC ENTRANCE DOORS, PROPOSED NEW RAMP, ERECTION OF 2M HIGH CLOSE BOARDED FENCE AND GATES TO SERVICE YARD AND NEW SOUND ATTENUATION LOUVRE TO PLANT ROOM WALL
LOCATION: CO-OP 21-25 SOUTH DOWNS CHILTON CO DURHAM
APPLICANT: The Co-operative Group Food Retail , New Century House , P.O Box 53, Manchester, M60 4ES
DECISION: STANDARD APPROVAL on 21 July 2008
15. 7/2008/0297/DM OFFICER:Mark O'Sullivan
APPLICATION DATE: 6 June 2008
PROPOSAL: DISPLAY OF 6 INTERNALLY ILLUMINATED FASCIA SIGNS AND 2 TOTEM SIGNS TO THE NORTH, SOUTH, EAST AND WEST ELEVATION
LOCATION: FORMER CO-OP SUPERSTORE OXFORD ROAD SPENNYMOOR CO DURHAM
APPLICANT: Netto Foodstores Ltd Elmsall Way, South Elmsall, nr Pontefract, West Yorkshire, WF9 2XX
DECISION: STANDARD APPROVAL on 1 August 2008
Page 19
SEDGEFIELD BOROUGH COUNCIL
PLANNING APPLICATIONS - DELEGATED DECISIONS ______
16. 7/2008/0296/DM OFFICER:Mark O'Sullivan
APPLICATION DATE: 6 June 2008
PROPOSAL: ALTERATIONS TO EXISTING RETAIL UNIT TO INCLUDE NEW SHOP FRONTS OVERCLADDING OF EXISTING BRICK PARAPET AND WALLHEAD AND MINOR ALTERATIONS TO CAR PARK LAYOUT
LOCATION: FORMER CO-OP SUPERSTORE OXFORD STREET SPENNYMOOR CO DURHAM
APPLICANT: Netto Foodstores Ltd Elmsall Way, South Elmsall, nr Pontefract, West Yorkshire, WF9 2XX
DECISION: STANDARD APPROVAL on 1 August 2008
17. 7/2008/0295/DM OFFICER:David Gibson
APPLICATION DATE: 5 June 2008
PROPOSAL: ERECTION OF 3NO. POLE MOUNTED SIGNS
LOCATION: MCDONALDS RESTAURANT NEWTON PARK SERVICES COATHAM MUNDEVILLE CO DURHAM
APPLICANT: McDonalds Restaurants Ltd 11-59 High Road, East Finchley, London, N2 8AW
DECISION: STANDARD APPROVAL on 11 July 2008
18. 7/2008/0293/DM OFFICER:David Gibson
APPLICATION DATE: 30 May 2008
PROPOSAL: ERECTION OF TWO STOREY EXTENSION TO SOUTH ELEVATION, CONSERVATORY TO NORTH ELEVATION AND EXTENSION TO EXISTING STAFF CAR PARK
LOCATION: PIONEERING CARE CENTRE CARERS WAY NEWTON AYCLIFFE CO DURHAM
APPLICANT: Mr John Wilkinson Sedgefield Borough Council, Council Offices, Green Lane, Spennymoor, Co Durham, DL16 6JQ DECISION: STANDARD APPROVAL on 11 July 2008
Page 20
SEDGEFIELD BOROUGH COUNCIL
PLANNING APPLICATIONS - DELEGATED DECISIONS ______
19. 7/2008/0291/DM OFFICER:Mark O'Sullivan
APPLICATION DATE: 3 June 2008
PROPOSAL: ERECTION OF CONSERVATORY TO THE REAR
LOCATION: 11 ST PAULS CLOSE SPENNYMOOR CO DURHAM
APPLICANT: Mr Alexander Simms 11 St Pauls Close, Spennymoor, Co Durham
DECISION: STANDARD APPROVAL on 18 July 2008
20. 7/2008/0342/DM OFFICER:Mark O'Sullivan
APPLICATION DATE: 24 June 2008
PROPOSAL: DEMOLITION OF EXISTING CONSERVATORY AND ERECTION OF SUN ROOM TO THE REAR
LOCATION: 1 WHITWORTH MEADOWS SPENNYMOOR CO DURHAM
APPLICANT: Mr Harry Roche 1 Whitworth Meadows, Spennymoor, Co Durham
DECISION: STANDARD APPROVAL on 29 July 2008
21. 7/2008/0288/DM OFFICER:David Gibson
APPLICATION DATE: 23 June 2008
PROPOSAL: ERECTION OF EXTENSION TO EXISTING GARAGE
LOCATION: 31 BRAFFERTON CLOSE WOODHAM NEWTON AYCLIFFE CO DURHAM
APPLICANT: Mr A Hope 31 Brafferton Close, Woodham, Newton Aycliffe, Co Durham, DL5 4RQ
DECISION: STANDARD APPROVAL on 1 August 2008
Page 21
SEDGEFIELD BOROUGH COUNCIL
PLANNING APPLICATIONS - DELEGATED DECISIONS ______
22. 7/2008/0284/DM OFFICER:Mark O'Sullivan
APPLICATION DATE: 16 June 2008
PROPOSAL: ERECTION OF SINGLE STOREY SIDE AND REAR EXTENSION
LOCATION: 9 DEAN PARK FERRYHILL CO DURHAM
APPLICANT: Mr Gary Wood 9 Dean Park , Ferryhill , Co Durham , DL17 8HP
DECISION: STANDARD APPROVAL on 18 July 2008
23. 7/2008/0282/DM OFFICER:David Gibson
APPLICATION DATE: 28 May 2008
PROPOSAL: CHANGE OF USE OF FIRST FLOOR FROM RETAIL TO 2NO. FLATS AND CREATION OF ACCESS TO REAR, ALTERATIONS TO GROUND FLOOR SHOP LAYOUT AND NEW SHOP FRONT AND FASCIA
LOCATION: 38 CHURCH STREET SHILDON CO DURHAM
APPLICANT: Charminster Developments Fockbury House, Fockbury, Dodford, Bromsgrove, Worcester, B61 9AP
DECISION: STANDARD APPROVAL on 23 July 2008
24. 7/2008/0281/DM OFFICER:David Gibson
APPLICATION DATE: 28 May 2008
PROPOSAL: ERECTION OF CONSERVATORY TO REAR AND CREATION OF PITCHED ROOF OVER EXISTING FLAT ROOF
LOCATION: 43 EDEN ROAD NEWTON AYCLIFFE CO DURHAM
APPLICANT: Mrs M Kennedy 43 Eden Road, Newton Aycliffe, Co Durham, DL5 5RL
DECISION: STANDARD APPROVAL on 11 July 2008
Page 22
SEDGEFIELD BOROUGH COUNCIL
PLANNING APPLICATIONS - DELEGATED DECISIONS ______
25. 7/2008/0277/DM OFFICER:Mark O'Sullivan
APPLICATION DATE: 6 June 2008
PROPOSAL: ERECTION OF EXTENSION TO EXISTING GARAGE
LOCATION: SOUTH VIEW TODHILLS CO DURHAM
APPLICANT: Mr & Mrs David R Palmer South View, Todhills, Co Durham , DL14 8BB
DECISION: STANDARD APPROVAL on 18 July 2008
26. 7/2008/0273/DM OFFICER:Mark O'Sullivan
APPLICATION DATE: 28 May 2008
PROPOSAL: CHANGE OF USE TO A5 (HOT FOOD TAKEAWAY)
LOCATION: 51 ATTWOOD TERRACE TUDHOE SPENNYMOOR CO DURHAM
APPLICANT: Mr Xie yue Gao 82 Dovecot Street , Stockton on Tees, TS18 1HA
DECISION: STANDARD REFUSAL on 21 July 2008
27. 7/2008/0266/DM OFFICER:David Gibson
APPLICATION DATE: 27 May 2008
PROPOSAL: ERECTION OF EXTENSION AND PITCHED ROOF TO EXISTING GARAGE
LOCATION: 34 STEPHENSON WAY NEWTON AYCLIFFE CO DURHAM
APPLICANT: Mr B Gash 34 Stephenson Way, Newton Aycliffe, Co Durham, DL5 7AP
DECISION: STANDARD APPROVAL on 11 July 2008
Page 23
SEDGEFIELD BOROUGH COUNCIL
PLANNING APPLICATIONS - DELEGATED DECISIONS ______
28. 7/2008/0260/DM OFFICER:David Gibson
APPLICATION DATE: 16 May 2008
PROPOSAL: INSTALLATION OF FASCIA SIGN
LOCATION: CO-OP FUNERAL CARE 85 CHURCH STREET SHILDON CO DURHAM
APPLICANT: CWS Retail Financial Services Hanover Buildings, Po Box 53, New Century House, Manchester, Lancashire
DECISION: STANDARD APPROVAL on 11 July 2008
29. 7/2008/0259/DM OFFICER:David Gibson
APPLICATION DATE: 27 May 2008
PROPOSAL: CONVERSION OF GARAGE TO HABITABLE ROOM
LOCATION: 21 OAKLEA MEWS AYCLIFFE VILLAGE NEWTON AYCLIFFE CO DURHAM DL5 6JP
APPLICANT: Mr Sean Smith 21 Oaklea Mews , Aycliffe Village, Newton Aycliffe, County Durham, DL5 6JP
DECISION: STANDARD APPROVAL on 11 July 2008
30. 7/2008/0254/DM OFFICER:David Gibson
APPLICATION DATE: 28 May 2008
PROPOSAL: ERECTION OF SINGLE STOREY GARDEN ROOM TO REAR
LOCATION: 15 ACLE MEADOWS NEWTON AYCLIFFE CO DURHAM DL5 4XD
APPLICANT: Mr John Knowlson 15 Acle Meadow, Newton Aycliffe, Co Durham, DL5 4XD
DECISION: STANDARD APPROVAL on 11 July 2008
Page 24
SEDGEFIELD BOROUGH COUNCIL
PLANNING APPLICATIONS - DELEGATED DECISIONS ______
31. 7/2008/0251/DM OFFICER:Mark O'Sullivan
APPLICATION DATE: 24 June 2008
PROPOSAL: ERECTION OF SINGLE STOREY EXTENSION TO THE REAR
LOCATION: 48 CHURCH LANE FERRYHILL CO. DURHAM
APPLICANT: Mr I Lidster 48 Church Lane, Ferryhill, Durham, DL17 8LP
DECISION: STANDARD APPROVAL on 1 August 2008
32. 7/2008/0242/DM OFFICER:David Gibson
APPLICATION DATE: 6 May 2008
PROPOSAL: ERECTION OF PHARMACY EXTENSION TO EXISTING MEDICAL SURGERY TO PROVIDE DISPENSARY AND ASSOCIATED SALES AREA AND ERECTION OF NEW BIN STORE
LOCATION: 2 PEASE WAY NEWTON AYCLIFFE CO DURHAM DL5 5NH
APPLICANT: Mr Mike Spence Peaseway Medical Centre, Peaseway, Newton Aycliffe, Co. Durham , DL5 5NH
DECISION: STANDARD APPROVAL on 11 July 2008
33. 7/2008/0234/DM OFFICER:David Gibson
APPLICATION DATE: 25 April 2008
PROPOSAL: CREATION OF NEW ENTRANCE AND SCREENS, CANOPY WITH RAMP, NEW REFUSE STORAGE AREA TO WEST ELEVATION, RELOCATION OF EXISTING ATM TO EAST ELEVATION AND CREATION OF 12NO. ADDITIONAL CAR PARKING SPACES
LOCATION: THE CO-OPERATIVE STORE CHURCH STREET SHILDON CO DURHAM
APPLICANT: The Co-operative Group Property Division, Po Box 53, New Century House, Manchester, M60 4ES
DECISION: STANDARD APPROVAL on 1 August 2008
Page 25
SEDGEFIELD BOROUGH COUNCIL
PLANNING APPLICATIONS - DELEGATED DECISIONS ______
34. 7/2008/0221/DM OFFICER:David Gibson
APPLICATION DATE: 28 April 2008
PROPOSAL: INSTALLATION OF 2 NO. INTERNALLY ILLUMINATED FASCIA PANELS
LOCATION: 2 PEASE WAY NEWTON AYCLIFFE CO DURHAM DL5 5NH
APPLICANT: AAH Plc Sapphire Court, Walsgrove Triangle Indust Park, Coventry, Warwickshire, CV2 2TX
DECISION: STANDARD APPROVAL on 11 July 2008
35. 7/2008/0201/DM OFFICER:David Gibson
APPLICATION DATE: 19 June 2008
PROPOSAL: ERECTION OF DETACHED DOUBLE GARAGE
LOCATION: HILDYARD HOUSE REAR OF REDWORTH ROAD SHILDON CO DURHAM
APPLICANT: Mr A Howard Hildyard House, Rear of Redworth Road, Shildon, Co Durham, DL4 2JR
DECISION: STANDARD APPROVAL on 24 July 2008
36. 7/2008/0182/DM OFFICER:Mark O'Sullivan
APPLICATION DATE: 2 April 2008
PROPOSAL: PROPOSED EXTENSION TO VEHICLE REPAIR WORKSHOP
LOCATION: S CARS 4/5 POST OFFICE STREET REAR OF COULSON STREET SPENNYMOOR CO DURHAM DL16 7RS
APPLICANT: Mr Stuart Illingworth 4/5 Post Office Street, Spennymoor, County Durham, DL16 7RS
DECISION: STANDARD APPROVAL on 21 July 2008
Page 26
SEDGEFIELD BOROUGH COUNCIL
PLANNING APPLICATIONS - DELEGATED DECISIONS ______
37. 7/2008/0127/DM OFFICER:David Gibson
APPLICATION DATE: 26 March 2008
PROPOSAL: DEMOLITION OF EXISTING PREMISES AND ERECTION OF 2NO. HOUSES AND 6NO. FLATS
LOCATION: COMPASS HOUSE SOUTH VIEW SHILDON CO DURHAM
APPLICANT: Mr Elijah Ward The Paddock, Barmpton, Darlington, Durham, DL1 3JG
DECISION: STANDARD APPROVAL on 21 July 2008
38. 7/2008/0099/DM OFFICER:David Gibson
APPLICATION DATE: 22 February 2008
PROPOSAL: DEMOLITION OF EXISTING BUILDING TO CREATE NEW CAR PARK AREA
LOCATION: FORMER HOESCH WOODHEAD WORKS SPRING ROAD AYCLIFFE INDUSTRIAL PARK NEWTON AYCLIFFE CO DURHAM
APPLICANT: P.W.S Distributors 20 Station Road, Aycliffe Industrial Park, Newton Aycliffe, Co Durham, DL5 6XJ
DECISION: STANDARD APPROVAL on 11 July 2008
39. 7/2007/0694/DM OFFICER:David Gibson
APPLICATION DATE: 12 December 2007
PROPOSAL: APPLICATION FOR A CERTIFICATE OF LAWFULNESS FOR THE ERECTION OF STABLES, KENNELS, CONTAINERS AND BUILDINGS
LOCATION: CLEARWATER CREEK COATHAM MUNDEVILLE DARLINGTON CO DURHAM
APPLICANT: Miss J Saint Clearwater Creek, Coatham Mundeville, Co Durham
DECISION: STANDARD APPROVAL on 11 July 2008
Page 27
SEDGEFIELD BOROUGH COUNCIL
PLANNING APPLICATIONS - DELEGATED DECISIONS ______
40. 7/2008/0286/DM OFFICER:Mark O'Sullivan
APPLICATION DATE: 10 June 2008
PROPOSAL: ERECTION OF EXTERNAL PLANT AND COMPOUND COMPRISING OF 4 CONDENSER UNITS, AIR CONDITIONING UNIT, ASSOCIATED UNITS, ACCESS GATES AND 2.55M HIGH BOARDED TIMBER FENCE TO THE EASTERN ELEVATION
LOCATION: CO-OP STORE OXFORD STREET SPENNYMOOR CO DURHAM
APPLICANT: THE Co-op group Property Division , P.O. Box 53, New Century House, Manchester, M60 4ES
DECISION: STANDARD APPROVAL on 18 July 2008
41. 7/2008/0353/DM OFFICER:Mark O'Sullivan
APPLICATION DATE: 30 June 2008
PROPOSAL: ERECTION OF CONSERVATORY TO THE REAR
LOCATION: RED LEA NORTH STREET BYERS GREEN CO DURHAM
APPLICANT: Mr & Mrs Walker Red Lea, North Street, Byers Green, Co Durham
DECISION: STANDARD APPROVAL on 29 July 2008
Page 28 Item 7
SEDGEFIELD BOROUGH COUNCIL
APPEALS OUTSTANDING UP TO 5 th AUGUST 2008
Ref.No. AP/2007/0003 Location LAND NORTH EAST OF HIGH STREET BYERS GREEN SPENNYMOOR CO DURHAM Proposal RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT (OUTLINE APPLICATION) Appellant Mr A Watson Received 16 th April 2007
An Inspector’s letter was received on 29 th February 2008. The Appeal was Upheld. The details of the decision will be reported to Committee in due course. ______
Ref.No. AP/2007/0006 Location WOODLANDS 16 TUDHOE VILLAGE SPENNYMOOR CO DURHAM Proposal DEMOLITION AND RECONSTRUCTION OF EXISTING DWELLINGHOUSE (APPLICATION FOR CONSERVATION AREA CONSENT) Appellant Mr & Mrs Jackson Received 24 th May 2007
An Inspector’s letter was received on 16 th May 2008. The Appeal was Upheld. The details of the decision will be reported to Committee in due course. ______
Ref.No. AP/2007/0007 Location WOODLANDS 16 TUDHOE VILLAGE SPENNYMOOR CO DURHAM Proposal DEMOLITION AND RECONSTRUCTION OF EXISTING BUILDING ANNEX TO BE RETAINED & REFURBISHED Appellant Mr & Mrs Jackson Received 24 th May 2007
An Inspector’s letter was received on 16 th May 2008. The Appeal was Upheld. The details of the decision will be reported to Committee in due course.
Ref.No. AP/2007/0008 Location LAND NORTH OF WOODHAM HOUSE RUSHYFORD CO DURHAM DL17 0NN Proposal ERECTION OF DETACHED DWELLING WITH ASSOCIATED ACCESS AND ERECTION OF DOUBLE GARAGE (OUTLINE APPLICATION) Appellant Dr & Mrs H J Stafford Received 25 th May 2007
An Inspector’s letter was received on 7 th March 2008. The Appeal was Dismissed.
Page 29
Ref.No. AP/2007/0011 Location 11 BRIDGE HOUSE ESTATE FERRYHILL CO DURHAM Proposal ERECTION OF TWO STOREY SIDE EXTENSION Appellant Mr Joe Ward Received 20 th July 2007
An Inspector’s letter was received on 30 th October 2007. The Appeal was Upheld.
Ref.No. AP/2008/0001 Location LAND WEST OF HARDWICK PARK AND NORTH OF THE A689 SEDGEFIELD STOCKTON ON TEES Proposal CHANGE OF USE OF THE LAND FOR THE SITING OF 330 STATIC CARAVANS AND 48 LODGES TOGETHER WITH ANCILLARY LANDSCAPE, ACCESS, DRAINAGE AND ENGINEERING WORKS AND THE USE OF BRAKES FARMHOUSE AS A MANAGEMENT CENTRE TOGETHER WITH THE ERECTION OF AN AGRICULTURAL BUILDING TO INCLUDE ANCILLARY SHOP Appellant Theakston Farms LLP Received 27 th February 2008
The Appeal is to be dealt with by way of a Public Inquiry.
Ref.No. AP/2008/0002 Location 29 LISLE ROAD NEWTON AYCLIFFE CO DURHAM DL5 7QX Proposal ERECTION OF EXTENSION TO FRONT AND FIRST FLOOR SIDE EXTENSION Appellant Mrs Nina Bell Received 27 th February 2008
An Inspector’s letter was received on 28 th May 2008. The Appeal was Dismissed.
Ref.No. AP/2008/0003 Location LOW HARDWICK FARM SEDGEFIELD CO DURHAM Proposal USE OF LAND FOR OFF ROAD RECREATIONAL MOTOR SPORTS ACTIVITY AND ASSOCIATED ENGINEERING OPERATIONS (RETROSPECTIVE) Appellant Mr Alf Walton Received 25 th March 2008
The Appeal is to be dealt with by way of a Public Inquiry ______
Page 30
Ref.No. AP/2008/0004 Location THE LARCHES THORPE LARCHES SEDGEFIELD CO DURHAM TS21 3HH Proposal ERECTION OF 1 NO. DWELLING (OUTLINE APPLICATION) Appellant Mr M Mehra Received 18 th March 2008
An Inspector’s decision letter was received on 7 th July 2008. The Appeal was Dismissed.
Ref.No. AP/2008/0005 Location REAR OF 51 ATTWOOD TERRACE TUDHOE SPENNYMOOR CO. DURHAM Proposal CHANGE OF USE FROM BAKEHOUSE TO 1NO. 2 BED DWELLING INCLUDING INCREASING ROOF HEIGHT TO CREATE FIRST FLOOR LIVING SPACE Appellant Pauleen Sedgewick Received 8th May 2008
The Appeal is to be dealt with by way of Written Representations ______
Ref.No. AP/2008/0006 Location ST JOHNS SCHOOL HOUSE CENTRAL PARADE SHILDON CO DURHAM Proposal ERECTION OF DWELLING AND DETACHED DOUBLE GARAGE WITH BOILER ROOM Appellant Mr D Stephenson Received 13 th June 2008
The Appeal is to be dealt with by way of Written Representations
Ref.No. AP/2008/0007 Location LAND ADJOINING WOODHAM BRIDGE NEWTON AYCLIFFE CO DURHAM Proposal PROPOSED DIVERSION OF WOODHAM BURN, FLOOD PREVENTION WORKS AND ERECTION OF 100 DWELLINGS AND ASSOCIATED ACCESS (OUTLINE APPLICATION) Appellant Camtec Properties (Newton Aycliffe) Ltd Received 8 th July 2008
An Inspectorate’s letter was received on 18 th July 2008. The Appeal was Withdrawn by the applicant. ______
Page 31
Ref.No. AP/2008/0008/EN Location 17 NORTH END SEDGEFIELD STOCKTON ON TEES Proposal APPEAL AGAINST REMEDIAL NOTICE Appellant Wendy Earnshaw Received 24 th July 2008
The Appeal is to be dealt with by way of Written Representations ______
Ref.No. AP/2008/0009 Location 128 HIGH STREET BYERS GREEN SPENNYMOOR CO DURHAM Proposal ERECTION OF TWO STOREY REAR EXTENSION Appellant Mrs P Green Received 24 th July 2008
The Appeal is to be dealt with by way of Written Representations ______
Page 32
Page 33 This page is intentionally left blank
Page 34
Item 8
DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE
15 th August 2008
Report of the Director of Neighbourhood Services
The following planning appeal decision is reported for information purposes:
LAND TO THE NORTH (REAR GARDEN) OF WOODHAM HOUSE, RUSHYFORD.
APPEAL DESCRIPTION
Erection of detached dwelling with associated access and erection of double garage (outline application).
The application was refused for the following reasons:
The application site forms part of an area of land identified as a Green Wedge where, by virtue of Policy E4 (Designation and safeguarding of green wedges) of the Sedgefield Borough Local Plan, there is a presumption against built development unless it is essential that it is located within a Green Wedge. The applicants have failed to demonstrate that it is essential for the dwelling to be sited within a Green Wedge and in the absence of a proven need, the development proposed would represent an unsustainable and undesirable physical and visual intrusion beyond the physically defined boundaries of Newton Aycliffe to the detriment of the appearance of the area. Furthermore, if approved, the development proposed would undermine the value of the 'Green Wedge' as a means of maintaining the distinction between the built up area of Newton Aycliffe and the Countryside beyond contrary to Policy E4 (Designation and safeguarding of green wedges) of the Sedgefield Borough Local Plan.
In the opinion of the Local Planning Authority the proposal constitutes unsustainable residential development in the open countryside contrary to the established policy of resisting new residential development within the countryside to that which is required by persons solely or mainly in agriculture or forestry for whom it is essential to live in close proximity to their place of employment in order to perform their duties. No such justification for the dwelling has been provided or proven in this case. The proposal is therefore contrary to Sedgefield Borough Local Plan H12 (Housing in the countryside for agriculture or forestry workers) and the more current guidance of PPS1 (Delivering sustainable development), PPG3 (Housing) and PPS7 (Sustainable development in rural areas).
The applicant contended that the value of the green wedge has already been compromised by the existing dwellings already located on site, that the proposed dwelling would not detrimentally affect the character or appearance of the area and that any detriment arising would be out weighed by the improvement to the access and parking for Nos. 1 and 2 Woodham Cottages.
The appeal was heard by way of an informal hearing.
Page 35
APPEAL DECISION
The appeal was DISMISSED
ANALYSIS OF THE APPEAL DECISION
The Inspector in dismissing the appeal in favour of the Council considered that:
• the existing housing to the west of the appeal site formed a clear edge to the built up area of Newton Aycliffe and that they is a clear presumption against built development on this site which is located in the green wedge.
• The appeal site has an open character and appearance, which helps to provide an important buffer between the built up area and the A167 and the wider countryside, and that this helps to provide a rural setting for the town. The Inspector agreed with the Local Planning Authority’s view that the construction of an additional dwelling at this location would significantly and detrimentally alter the character of this area and would undermine the contribution that this makes to the green wedge and the built up area.
• Although the existing access and parking arrangements for Nos. 1 and 2 Woodham Cottages are unsatisfactory and would be improved, were the proposed scheme to be implemented, he noted that these could be achieved without the construction of the new dwelling.
CONCLUSION
In conclusion, the Inspector agreed with the Local Planning Authority’s view that the resultant highway safety improvements arising from this application were not sufficient to outweigh the significant harm that would be caused to the character and appearance of the area by the construction of a new dwelling in a green wedge out with the built up area of Newton Aycliffe.
Page 36
Page 37
Page 38
Page 39
Page 40
DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE
15 th August 2008
Report of the Director of Neighbourhood Services
The following planning appeal decision is reported for information purposes:
2a HIGH GREEN NEWTON AYCLIFFE COUNTY DURHAM DL5 4RZ
APPEAL DESCRIPTION
Erection of boundary wall.
The application was refused for the following reasons:
In the opinion of the Local Planning Authority the proposed boundary treatment is considered to be an incongruous feature within the section of the streetscene in which the application property is positioned, which is characterised by its open plan frontage. The proposal would therefore by contrary to Policy D1 (General Principles for the Layout and Design of New Developments) of the adopted Sedgefield Borough Local Plan and the adopted Sedgefield Borough Residential Extensions Supplementary Planning Document (February 2006)
APPEAL DECISION
The appeal was DISMISSED
ANALYSIS OF THE APPEAL DECISION
The Inspector in dismissing the appeal in favour of the Council considered that:
• The main issue in this case is the effect of the proposed boundary treatment on the character and appearance of the street scene. The inspector noted that policy D1 of the adopted Sedgefield Borough Local Plan includes the requirement that development, including boundary treatment, should help to create a sense of place. In addition, he noted that the Council had produced a Supplementary Planning Document giving guidance on residential extensions and includes specific reference to walls and fences. This states that gates, walls and fences should not be permitted on open plan estates and where allowed should relate to the existing style of boundary treatment in the area.
• The inspector considered that owing to its prominent location the proposed boundary treatment would be obtrusive and represent a highly discordant element in the street scene. It would thus conflict with policy D1 and the Council’s Supplementary Planning Document on residential extensions and result in very significant harm to the character and appearance of the street scene.
Page 41
CONCLUSION
On this occasion the inspector, in arriving at his decision, gave significant weight to the Local Plan and the Council’s Supplementary Planning Document.
Page 42
Page 43
Page 44
DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE
15 th August 2008
Report of the Director of Neighbourhood Services
The following planning appeal decision is reported for information purposes:
11 BRIDGE HOUSE ESTATE FERRYHILL CO DURHAM DL17 8EY
APPEAL DESCRIPTION
Erection of two storey side extension - study/utility/WC//bedroom/bathroom to dwelling .
The application was refused for the following reasons:
In the opinion of the Local Planning Authority, the proposed two storey side extension would appear excessive in scale and massing in relation to the host building, and inappropriate in design. The proposed extension would fail to appear subservient to the host dwelling, resulting in an overbearing form of development which detracts from the distinct balanced character and appearance of the original dwelling, and to the detriment of the appearance of the wider street scene. The proposal would therefore, be contrary to adopted Local Plan Policy H15 (Extensions to dwellings), and the adopted Supplementary Planning Document for Residential Extensions (February 2006), which seek to ensure that extensions are appropriate in scale and design in relation to their host, and that there are no unfavourable impacts upon the surrounding street scene.
APPEAL DECISION
The appeal was UPHELD.
ANALYSIS OF THE APPEAL DECISION
The inspector in upholding the appeal in favour of the appellant considered that:
• The main issue was the effect of the proposed extension on the character and appearance of the host dwelling and the wider street scene.
• Resisting any form of side extension was not a reasonable or sustainable position to take and, in the circumstances, the“unbalancing” of the façade did not represent a critical objection to the proposal.
• Great weight needed to be attached to the adopted supplementary planning document (SPD) on “Residential Extensions” Paragraph 6.4 advises that side extensions should maintain a minimum 1 metre distance to the side boundary and suggests that ground floors should be set back from the frontage by 200mm and first floors by 1 metre along with a lowered ridgeline. The proposal would only meet the first of these. Again the inspector did not consider this to be a critical objection in the particular circumstances of
Page 45
this case and noted, from paragraph 3.1 that the SPD is merely guidance to be taken into account.
• Overall the proposed extension would not have a detrimental effect on the character and appearance of the host dwelling and the wider street scene.
CONCLUSION
Whilst the inspector initially gave ‘great weight’ to the Council’s residential extensions SPD the fact that it is guidance only appears to have diminished the weight that the inspector eventually gave to the SPD. The decision is a particularly disappointing one in so much as the original dwelling was an attractive symmetrical property and was capable of being extended in a more sympathetic manner.
Page 46
Page 47
Page 48
DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE
15 th August 2008
Report of the Director of Neighbourhood Services
The following planning appeal decision is reported for information purposes:
1 ASSOCIATION COURT SHILDON CO DURHAM DL4 1EL
APPEAL DESCRIPTION
Erection of dormer bungalow (Outline)
APPEAL DECISION
The appeal was WITHDRAWN by the applicant.
Page 49
DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE
15 th August 2008
Report of the Director of Neighbourhood Services
The following planning appeal decision is reported for information purposes:
29 LISLE ROAD NEWTON AYCLIFFE CO DURHAM DL5 7QX
APPEAL DESCRIPTION
Forward ground floor level extension and first floor extension over garage.
The application was refused for the following reasons:
As a result of the extension extending up to the side boundary with the neighbouring property it is the opinion of the Local Planning Authority that the proposed two-storey side extension would result in the potential for the creation of a terracing effect should 27 Lisle Road extend to the side of the property. This would be to the detriment of the appearance of the wider street scene. The proposal is not subservient to the original dwelling and would therefore, be contrary to adopted Local Plan Policy H15 (B) Extensions to Dwellings, and the adopted Supplementary Planning Document for Residential Extensions (February 2006).
The proposed development, which incorporates a forward extension, would be out of keeping with the elevational treatment of the existing property and would amount to an incongruous feature which would detract from the appearance of the property. The proposal, if approved, could lead to the approval of extensions of a similar nature, to the detriment of the visual amenity of the area. As such the proposal would be contrary to Local Plan Policy H16 and the adopted Supplementary Planning Document for Residential Extensions (February 2006) which seek to ensure household extensions are of a scale and design which is compatible with the application property, the host property and do not adversely affect the general character of the street scene and the relationship between dwellings.
APPEAL DECISION
The appeal was DISMISSED
ANALYSIS OF THE APPEAL DECISION
The inspector in dismissing the appeal in favour of the Council considered that:
• The determining issue is the effect of the proposed extension upon the appearance and character of the existing property and the street scene in general.
• Considerable weight should be attached to the Council’s Residential Extensions Supplementary Planning Document (SPD). Since there would be no set down in roof
Page 50
level, no set back of the front wall of the side extension and no set in from the side boundary, the proposals would be contrary in all these respects with the SPD guidelines.
• In addition, the respective elements of the building mass that comprise the semi- detached pair would become out of proportion, the insubordinate and dominating scale of the extensions unbalancing the composition and significantly reducing the open gap between the appeal property and neighbouring No 27. This would create the potential for a terraced effect in the street scene.
• The scale, mass and design of the proposed scheme would harm the appearance and character of the host dwelling and the pair of dwellings of which it forms part and prove detrimental to the street scene in general. This would be contrary to the provisions of saved Policy H15 of the Sedgefield Borough Local Plan which seeks extensions of a scale and design compatible with the existing dwelling and the character of the area and contrary to the SPD.
CONCLUSION
On this occasion the inspector gave significant weight to the SPD despite acknowledging that it was guidance only. The inspector also considered that the ‘unbalancing’ effect of the extension was a significant material planning consideration unlike the previous case where the inspector dismissed this particular argument.
Page 51
Page 52
Page 53
DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE
15 th August 2008
Report of the Director of Neighbourhood Services
The following planning appeal decision is reported for information purposes:
THE LARCHES THORPE LARCHES SEDGEFIELD CO DURHAM TS21 3HH
APPEAL DESCRIPTION
Erection of single dwellinghouse
The application was refused for the following reasons:
In the opinion of the Local Planning Authority the proposal constitutes unsustainable residential development in the open countryside contrary to Policy H11 of the Sedgefield Borough Local Plan (The extension, infilling or redevelopment of ribbons or of sporadic groups of houses outside main Towns and villages).
In the opinion of the Local Planning Authority the proposal constitutes unsustainable residential development in the open countryside contrary to the established policy of restricting new residential development within the open countryside to that which is required by persons solely or mainly in agriculture or forestry for whom it is essential to live in close proximity to their place of employment in order to perform their duties. No such justification for the dwelling has been provided or proven in this case. The proposal is therefore contrary to guidance of National Planning Policy Statement 3 (Housing) and Planning Policy Statement 7 (Sustainable development in rural areas)
APPEAL DECISION
The appeal was DISMISSED
ANALYSIS OF THE APPEAL DECISION
The inspector in dismissing the appeal in favour of the Council considered that:
• The main issue was whether the site is a sustainable location for new residential development.
• A strategic policy objective of Planning Policy Statement 3: Housing (PPS3) is to create sustainable, inclusive, mixed communities in all areas both urban and rural. Housing should be in locations which offer a range of community facilities with good access to jobs, key services and infrastructure. This objective is also reflected in Policy H10 of the local plan. The appeal site is in a location which offers no community facilities. There would be little realistic opportunity of walking to access local services. Cycling would not be an attractive option as the only access is onto a busy main road. Most journeys would need to be made by car or by public transport. Page 54
• Land that is or has been occupied by agricultural buildings is excluded from the definition of previously developed land in PPS3. I appreciate that the proposed development would have the advantage of tidying up the site. However, it does not have any special priority for development.
• PPS7 encourages limited development in, or next to, rural settlements in order to meet local business and community needs. However, the proposed development would offer very little, if any, benefits in this respect. Nor would a single house help in any significant way to maintain the vitality of the local community or enhance local distinctiveness in this backland location.
• Any adverse effects, particularly in terms of additional vehicular traffic, would be limited. Nevertheless, I conclude that this is not a sustainable location for new residential development. It would therefore conflict with the objectives of PPS3, PPS7 and Policy H10 in the local plan.
CONCLUSION
The inspector, whilst mindful of the fact that the proposal only entailed a single dwelling, considered that the site was not a sustainable location for new residential development. It is also worth noting that the inspector also considered the benefits that limited development could have within rural communities but concluded that the development involving a single dwelling would not help to maintain the vitality of the local community or enhance local distinctiveness.
Page 55
Page 56
Page 57
RECOMMENDATION
That the information be noted.
Page 58 By virtue of paragraph(s) 1, 6 of Part 1 of Schedule 12A Item 9 of the Local Government Act 1972.
Document is Restricted
Page 59 This page is intentionally left blank
Page 60 By virtue of paragraph(s) 1, 6 of Part 1 of Schedule 12A Item 10 of the Local Government Act 1972.
Document is Restricted
Page 61 This page is intentionally left blank
Page 66 By virtue of paragraph(s) 1, 6 of Part 1 of Schedule 12A Item 11 of the Local Government Act 1972.
Document is Restricted
Page 67 This page is intentionally left blank
Page 74