Area Planning Committee (South and West)

Date Thursday 16 February 2017 Time 2.00 pm Venue Council Chamber, Council Offices, Spennymoor

Business

Part A

1. Apologies for Absence 2. Substitute Members 3. Declarations of Interest (if any) 4. The Minutes of the Meeting held on 19 January 2017 (Pages 3 - 6) 5. Applications to be determined

a) DM/16/02030/FPA - Lloyd Ltd, St Helen Way, St Helen Auckland, Bishop Auckland (Pages 7 - 18) Proposed warehouse, office and showroom extension with associated external works and change of use of land to vehicle storage

b) DM/16/03491/OUT - Ceramic Tile Centre, 3 Union Street, Bishop Auckland (Pages 19 - 32) Outline application for up to 17no. apartments with all matters reserved except access

c) DM/16/03932/FPA - George And Dragon Inn, Boldron, Barnard Castle (Pages 33 - 40) Change of use to single dwelling

d) DM/17/00080/FPA - Garage Block, Armstrong Close, Newton Aycliffe, Co Durham (Pages 41 - 54) 5no. dwellings (including demolition of garages)

6. 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 8 February 2017

To: The Members of the Area Planning Committee (South and West)

Councillor H Nicholson (Chairman) Councillor M Dixon (Vice-Chairman)

Councillors B Armstrong, D Bell, D Boyes, J Clare, K Davidson, E Huntington, C Kay, S Morrison, A Patterson, G Richardson, L Taylor, C Wilson and S Zair

Contact: Kirsty Gray Tel: 03000 269705 Agenda Item 4

DURHAM COUNTY COUNCIL

At a Meeting of Area Planning Committee (South and West) held in Council Chamber, Council Offices, Spennymoor on Thursday 19 January 2017 at 2.00 pm

Present:

Councillor H Nicholson (Chairman)

Members of the Committee: Councillors B Armstrong, D Bell, J Clare, K Davidson, J Gray, E Huntington, C Kay, S Morrison, A Patterson, G Richardson, L Taylor, C Wilson and S Zair

1 Apologies

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors D Boyes and M Dixon.

2 Substitute Members

Councillor J Gray substituted for Councillor M Dixon.

3 Declarations of Interest

Councillor A Patterson advised that she would be speaking as Local Member on both items on the Agenda and would not participate in the deliberation or decision making for either of the applications.

4 Minutes

The minutes of the meeting held on 15 December 2017 were agreed as a correct record and signed by the Chairman.

a DM/16/03590/OUT - Land East of North Bitchburn Terrace, North Bitchburn Bank, North Bitchburn

Consideration was given to the report of the Senior Planning Officer regarding an outline residential development and all matters reserved for 14 dwellings at Land East of North Bitchburn Terrace, North Bitchburn Bank, North Bitchburn.

The Senior Planning Officer gave a detailed presentation which included plans and photographs of the site.

Councillor Patterson spoke on behalf of local residents and confirmed that although only one objection had been received, a number of local residents had contacted her as local Member, in objection to the proposal.

Councillor Patterson confirmed that North Bitchburn was a small village, which was lacking in amenites and had no primary school. A former cricket ground was no longer in use and there was one pub which had closed and reopened under new

Page 3 management, numerous times. The nearest primary school in Howden-le-Wear was already over-subscribed and therefore children would be diverted to Crook Primary which had no direct bus route. In addition, Councillor Patterson confirmed that the site was not within the boundary of North Bitchburn, but situated in open Countryside. In summary, the location of the site was isolated and unsustainable and she supported the Senior Planning Officer’s recommendation to refuse the application.

Councillor Davidson moved the recommendation to refuse as he considered the reasons as outlined in the report sufficiently robust.

Councillor Clare referred to the response from the Highways Authority which was in the interest of public safety and could not be disregarded. He considered that if the required visibility splays could not be achieved this would pose a danger for motorists including those new to the area as they would not expect vehicles to be emerging from this point on this particular stretch of road.

In response to a question from Councillor Clare about a substandard section of footpath the Senior Planning Officer confirmed that although this had been referenced by the Highways Authority as being unsuitable, it was of relatively short length and although not ideal would not constitute a reason for refusal. Councillor Clare seconded the recommendation to refuse.

Resolved:

That the application be refused as per the recommendations outlined in the report.

b DM/16/03433/FPA - Site of Former Council Depot, Queen Street, Crook

Consideration was given to the report of the Senior Planning Officer regarding the erection of a food retail store with associated vehicular, pedestrian and cycle access, car parking and landscaping.

The Senior Planning Officer gave a detailed presentation which included plans and photographs of the site.

Councillor Patterson confirmed that this was a welcome application which would benefit Crook and Weardale. A pre-planning consultation had been attended by 300 people who were positive about the proposed new supermarket. Any concerns that had been put forward by residents or local businesses had been mitigated by the applicant. As well as creating jobs, Councillor Patterson confirmed that this type of supermarket would benefit low income families in the area and was a positive addition to the town.

Councillor Davidson moved the recommendation to approve and it was seconded by Councillor Clare.

Page 4 Resolved:

That the application be approved as per the recommendation and subject to the conditions as outlined in the report.

Page 5 This page is intentionally left blank Agenda Item 5a Planning Services COMMITTEE REPORT

APPLICATION DETAILS

APPLICATION NO: DM/16/02030/FPA Proposed warehouse, office and showroom FULL APPLICATION DESCRIPTION: extension with associated external works and change of use of land to vehicle storage NAME OF APPLICANT: Mr Barry Lloyd Lloyd Ltd, St Helen Way, St Helen Auckland, Bishop ADDRESS: Auckland, DL14 9AX ELECTORAL DIVISION: West Auckland Laura Eden Senior Planning Officer CASE OFFICER: 03000 263980 [email protected]

DESCRIPTION OF THE SITE AND PROPOSALS

The Site

1. The application site lies within St Helens Way, Bishop Auckland in an area defined as a general industrial estate by policy I5 of the Wear Valley District Local Plan. The surrounding area is predominantly within industrial usage particularly to the north, east and west. To the south, the site is bounded by the A688 West Auckland Bypass. Residential properties lie in excess of 100m away from the northern most part of the site.

2. The application site consists of two parcels of land which are physically separated by the estate road running east to west. Site A (southern area) relates to the existing Lloyd Ltd premises compromising of an existing warehouse building for the servicing of agricultural and industrial vehicles, with existing showroom, ancillary offices, vehicle storage pursuant to the business and car parking. The building is constructed from a mixture of metal cladding, red facing brickwork and metals framed openings. The site is bounded by a palisade fence. Site B (northern area) is within the general industrial estate designation but has not been developed and relates to an open area of grassland. There is a raised bund extending along the southern and western boundaries.

The Proposal

3. Planning permission is sought for the erection of two extensions to the existing building. The first would comprise of a new workshop located on its western side. The extension would measure 29.7m wide 26.8m long and would create an additional 750sqm. It would benefit from a dual pitched roof with an overall height of 8.9m which is higher than the existing. The other extension would be located to the south of the existing showroom and reception area and would allow for additional

Page 7 accommodation and ancillary offices. It would measure 14.8m wide by 17m long. It would also benefit from a dual pitched roof with an overall height of 5.8m which is lower than the existing. It is proposed that the materials to be used in construction would be similar in appearance to that of the existing building. The proposals would also include a new access into the site, replacement enclosures and new internal parking arrangements.

4. During the application process there have been a number of amendments to the scheme most notably in relation to Site B in order to accommodate drainage and flooding requirements. Whilst it was originally proposed to develop site B in its entirety only the eastern portion is now included. The alterations to the site include a change of use of the land and associated hard surfacing works so that the vehicles pursuant to the business can be stored. There will also be some additional car parking, a new palisade fence and vehicular access directly opposite to the existing access into Site A.

5. This application is being referred to the Planning Committee as the site area for the developments exceeds 1ha.

PLANNING HISTORY

6. Site A benefits from planning consents granted in 2000 and 2010 for the refurbishment of the existing building including ancillary landscaping improvements and a latter approval to extend to provide additional offices and showroom space.

PLANNING POLICY

NATIONAL POLICY:

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

8. The presumption in favour of sustainable development set out in the NPPF requires local planning authorities to approach development management decisions positively, utilising twelve ‘core planning principles’.

9. The following elements are considered relevant to this proposal;

10.NPPF Part 1 Building a Strong, Competitive Economy. The Government is committed to securing economic growth in order to create jobs and prosperity, building on the country's inherent strengths, and to meeting the twin challenges of global competition and of a low carbon future.

11.NPPF Part 4 – Promoting Sustainable Transport. Encouragement should be given to solutions which support reductions in greenhouse gas emissions and reduce congestion. Developments that generate significant movement should be located where the need to travel will be minimised and the use of sustainable transport modes maximised.

Page 8 12.NPPF Part 7 – Requiring Good Design. The Government attaches great importance to the design of the built environment, with good design a key aspect of sustainable development, indivisible from good planning.

13.NPPF Part 10 Meeting the Challange of Climate Change, Flooding and Coastal Change. Planning plays a key role in helping shape places to secure radical reductions in greenhouse gas emissions, minimising vulnerability and providing resilience to the impacts of climate change, and supporting the delivery of renewable and low carbon energy and associated infrastructure. This is central to the economic, social and environmental dimensions of sustainable development.

14.NPPF Part 11 – Conserving and Enhancing the Natural Environment. The Planning System should contribute to and enhance the natural and local environment by protecting and enhancing valued landscapes, geological conservation interests, recognising the wider benefits of ecosystems, minimising the impacts on biodiversity, preventing both new and existing development from contributing to or being put at unacceptable risk from pollution and land stability and remediating contaminated or other degraded land where appropriate.

The above represents a summary of the NPPF considered most relevant the full text may be accessed at: http://www.communities.gov.uk/publications/planningandbuilding/nppf

LOCAL PLAN POLICY:

Wear Valley District Local Plan

15.Policy GD1 (General Development Criteria) All new development and redevelopment within the District should be designed and built to a high standard and should contribute to the quality and built environment of the surrounding area.

16.Policy I5 (General Industrial Sites) Land as shown on the Proposals Map, will be reserved and developed as general industrial sites. Proposals for business uses (Class B1), general industry (Class B2) and warehousing and distribution (Class B8) will be permitted provided they fulfil, where relevant, the General Development Criteria. Consideration will be given to proposals for lorry parks. Proposals which would decrease the attractiveness of these industrial sites to potential developers will not be allowed.

17.Policy T1 (General Policy – Highways) All developments which generate additional traffic will be required to fulfil Policy GD1 and provide adequate access to the developments; not exceed the capacity of the local road network; and be capable of access by public transport networks.

RELEVANT EMERGING POLICY

The County Durham Plan

18.Paragraph 216 of the NPPF says that decision-takers may give weight to relevant policies in emerging plans according to: the stage of the emerging plan; the extent to which there are unresolved objections to relevant policies; and, the degree of consistency of the policies in the emerging plan to the policies in the NPPF. The County Durham Plan (CDP) was submitted for Examination in Public and a stage 1 Examination concluded. An Interim Report was issued by an Inspector dated 18 February 2015, however that Report was quashed by the High Court following a successful Judicial Review challenge by the Council. In accordance with the High Court Order, the Council has withdrawn the CDP and a new plan being prepared. In Page 9 the light of this, policies of the CDP can no longer carry any weight. As the new plan progresses through the stages of preparation it will begin to accrue weight.

CONSULTATION AND PUBLICITY RESPONSES

STATUTORY RESPONSES:

19.Highways Authority– No objection

20.Coal Authority - Require a condition to be imposed to secure intrusive site investigation works to establish whether the coal mining legacy poses a risk to the proposed development and if subsequent remediation work is required.

21.Environment Agency – No objection subject to a condition being imposed in relation to the approved Flood Risk Assessment

22.Northumbrian Water – A condition should be imposed with regards to foul water and surface drainage

INTERNAL CONSULTEE RESPONSES:

23.Landscape Section – No objections raised

24.Tree Officer – No arboricultural objection

25.Design and Conservation Section – Site is within an industrial estate and there are no heritage assets within the immediate vicinity and as such there are no heritage objection to this proposal. Subject to appropriate materials being used the overall design is considered broadly acceptable.

26.Public Rights of Way Officer – Request an informative is added to any consent to draw the developers attention to the fact that a PROW runs close to the site.

27.Drainage – Awaiting further comments at the time of preparing the report

28.Ecology – No objections to the proposals

29.Environmental Health (Contaminated Land) – Is satisfied with the submitted Phase 1 Desk Top Study and agrees with the risk assessment and recommendations. Due to its findings a contaminated land condition is required.

30.Environmental Health (Noise) – Following confirmation being provided in relation to the hours of operation of the business they confirm that they do not envisage any issues in relation to noise if operations are restricted to these hours. Request a condition is imposed in relation to any external lighting

PUBLIC RESPONSES:

31.The application has been advertised by a press notice, on site and neighbouring residents were notified. One letter of objection has been received from a local resident concerned about external lighting.

APPLICANTS STATEMENT:

32.None received

Page 10 PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS AND ASSESSMENT

33.Having regard to the requirements of Section 38(6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 the relevant Development Plan policies, relevant guidance and all other material planning considerations, including representations received, it is considered that the main planning issues in this instance relate to the principle of development; access and highway safety, impact on surrounding land users, visual and landscape impact, drainage and flooding and other considerations.

Principle of development

34.The application site lies within St Helens Way, Bishop Auckland in an area defined as a general industrial estate by policy I5 of the Wear Valley District Local Plan. The policy states that industrial uses will be permitted provided that it accords with policy GD1 where appropriate. The proposal relates to two adjacent sites, one which is occupied by the current business and one which is undeveloped. The proposal is therefore considered to lie within a suitable and sustainable location for development of this nature that is compliant with local plan policy.

35.The NPPF provides a presumption in favour of sustainable development and encourages the building of a strong, competitive economy. As outlined the proposal is considered to lie within a sustainable location and the development would support an existing business and employer within the area.

36.It is therefore considered that the principle of development is acceptable in terms of both local and national planning policy subject to the acceptability of detailed matters.

Access and Highway Safety

37.The Highways Authority has confirmed that the development would be served by an appropriate means of access and parking arrangements in line with both policies GD1 and T1 of the WVBLP.

38.Registered footpaths 27 and 28 Bishop Auckland run parallel with the estate road that runs north to south and the A688 to the south. Neither would be affected by the proposal as on this basis no objection has been raised by colleagues in the Public Rights of Way section.

Impact on surrounding land users

39.In terms of neighbouring amenity policy GD1 of the local plan aims to ensure that developments would not disturb or conflict with adjoining uses. The policy is in accordance with the NPPF as it too seeks to secure a good standard of amenity for all existing and future occupants of land and buildings.

40.It is not considered that the extensions to existing buildings, the reconfiguration of the site layout or the partial change of use of Site B to vehicle storage pursuant to existing site operations would have any significant adverse impact on the amenity of local land users given the overall design and location within an existing industrial estate. Furthermore, colleagues in the environmental health section have confirmed that they do not envisage any issues in relation to noise if operations are restricted to the proposed hours of operation.

Page 11 41.A concern has been raised by a local resident with regards to external lighting. The applicant has confirmed that it is likely external lighting will need to be installed at some point to assist their operations therefore it is considered appropriate to impose a condition to ensure any such scheme is agreed with the LPA prior to implementation.

Visual and Landscape Impact

42.Part 7 of the NPPF deals with good design generally advising that it is a key aspect of sustainable development, indivisible from good planning that can lead to making places better for people. Saved policy GD1 of the local plan is also considered relevant which requires developments to be in keeping with the character and appearance of the area and is designed to be appropriate in terms of form, mass, scale, layout and materials. Furthermore, proposals should not have a detrimental impact on the landscape quality of the surrounding area and that adequate landscaping is incorporated.

43.The site is located within a broadly industrial landscape and there are no designated heritage assets in the surrounding area. The extensions to the building would be of a broadly comparable height and would be seen against the backdrop of the existing built form. They would be constructed from materials that are similar in appearance to the existing although as the full details have not been provided it is considered necessary to impose a condition in this regard. A condition is also required in relation to the replacement and new boundary enclosures as the final details have not been confirmed. Site B is currently undeveloped however the proposed development of the eastern portion of the site would not have any significant visual impact given the surrounding context. In this regard it is considered that the proposed design of the extensions and works is appropriate and accords with both policy GD1 and part 7 of the NPPF.

44.The site does not lie within any locally or nationally designated landscape. Whilst the site is visible from the A688 West Auckland By-pass beyond the roadside hedge and more clearly from the road to the east the proposals will not make a significant difference to the visual or landscape effect of the site. There are trees located to the northern boundary of Site B outside of the application site but the plans indicate there will be no loss or risk of damage to these trees. Neither the landscape or arboriculture officer offer any objection to the development as a result.

Drainage and Flooding

45.There are areas of the site which are within Flood Zones 2 and 3. Such areas have the potential to flood and initially concerns were raised by both The Environmental Agency and colleagues in the drainage section that insufficient information has been provided to assess the potential flood risks. Following extensive discussions an amended Flood Risk Assessment including revisions to the plans have been agreed. On this basis that the mitigation measures are fully implemented prior to occupation the Environment Agency has withdrawn its objection. Northumbrian Water have raised no objection to the scheme on the basis that conditions are imposed with regards to foul and surface water drainage.

Other Considerations

46.Paragraph 11 of the NPPF and policy GD1 of the Local Plan requires that local planning authorities take into account, protect and mitigate the effects of development on biodiversity interests. The Site A plan shows areas along the southern and eastern boundaries which will benefit from wild flower meadow planting in support of the Page 12 national pollinator strategy. The Ecology Section offers no objection to the scheme. It is therefore considered that the granting of planning permission would not constitute a breach of the Conservation of Habitats & Species Regulations 2010 and the Planning Authority can satisfy its obligations under these.

47.A Phase 1 Contaminated Land Desk Top Study Report has been submitted in support of this application which makes recommendation for a Phase 2 Site Investigation. The contamination land officer is satisfied with the submitted report and its recommendations therefore suggests a condition is imposed requiring the submission of further information.

48.The application site falls within an defined as being at high risk from former coal mining activity. The applicant has obtained appropriate and up-to-date coal mining information for the proposed development site and has used this information to inform the Coal Mining Risk Assessment Report contained within the Phase 1 Assessment. The Coal Authority concurs with the recommendations of the assessment and recommends that a condition is imposed to require further investigations and remedial works if required.

CONCLUSION

49.It is considered that the combined sites represent suitable and sustainable locations for the change of use of land for vehicle storage and the extensions to the existing industrial business premises, without causing a significant adverse impact to residential and visual amenity in addition to highway safety. It is not considered that there would be any significant landscape impact as a result of the proposals. Issuing relating to flooding and drainage are proposed to be dealt with by means of a planning condition. Whilst the concerns of the neighbouring property are noted it is not considered they amount to reasons sufficient to justify refusal of the planning application. As a result, it is considered that the proposal is in accordance with the intentions of the National Planning Policy Framework and saved Policies of the Local Plan. The application is therefore recommended for approval.

RECOMMENDATION

That the application be APPROVED subject to the following conditions;

1. The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of three years from the date of this permission.

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

2. The development hereby approved shall be carried out in strict accordance with the following approved plans:

Phase 1 : Desk Top Study Report (2016-1998) by GEO Environmental Engineering dated 21/06/2016 Drg. no. AL (0) 1000 Rev. A received 14/07/2016 Drg. no. AL (0) 0020 Rev. D Amended Proposed Site Plan A received 02/11/2016 Drg. no. AL (0) 0021 Rev. G Amended Proposed Site Plan B received 02/11/2016 Drg. no. AL (0) 0150 Rev. B Proposed roof plan received 02/11/2016 Drg. no. AL (0) 0100 Rev. C Proposed floorplans received 02/11/2016

Page 13 Drg. no. AL (0) 0110 Rev. C Proposed elevations received 02/11/2016 Drg. no. AL (0) 0111 Rev. B Proposed elevations received 02/11/2016 Drg. no. C-GA-03 Rev. C proposed drainage layout received 26/01/2017 Drg. no. C-GA-02 REV D proposed engineering layout GA received 26/01/2017

Reason: To define the consent and ensure that a satisfactory form of development is obtained in accordance with saved policies GD1, I5 and T1 of the Wear Valley Local Plan.

3. The development permitted by this planning permission shall be carried out in accordance with the approved Flood Risk Assessment (FRA) December 2016 reference JCC16-114 by James Christopher Consulting and the following mitigation measures detailed within the FRA:

1. Bund must remain in the location as shown on submitted drawing Proposed Site B Plan Revision G and the road proposed to cut though the bund shall not be placed in any other location other than one specified on Proposed Site B Plan Revision G drawing

2. Building extension must remain outside of the Flood zones as shown in Proposed Site A Plan Revision D Drawing

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

The mitigation measures shall be fully implemented prior to occupation.

Reason : To reduce the risk of flooding to the proposed development and future occupants in accordance with Part 10 of the NPPF.

4. No external lighting shall be erected in association with the development hereby approved until the details of the external lighting have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local planning authority. The detail provided must be sufficient to demonstrate adherence to the ILP guidance notes for the reduction of intrusive light. The external lighting shall be erected and maintained in accordance with the approved details to minimise light spillage and glare outside the designated area.

Reason: In the interests of the amenity of the area in accordance with Policy GD1 of the Wear Valley District Local Plan.

5. The development hereby permitted shall not commence until a scheme to deal with contamination has been submitted to and agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority. The scheme shall include the following, unless the Local Planning Authority is satisfied that the site is suitable for the proposed use and dispenses of any such requirements, in writing:

Pre-Commencement

(a) A Phase 2 Site Investigation and Risk Assessment is required and shall be carried out by competent person(s) to fully and effectively characterise the nature and extent of any land and/or groundwater contamination and its implications.

(b) If the Phase 2 identifies any unacceptable risks, remediation is required and a Phase 3 Remediation Strategy detailing the proposed remediation and verification works shall be carried out by competent person(s). No alterations to the remediation Page 14 proposals shall be carried out without the prior written agreement of the Local Planning Authority. If during the remediation or development works any contamination is identified that has not been considered in the Phase 3, then remediation proposals for this material shall be agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority and the development completed in accordance with any amended specification of works.

Completion

(c) Upon completion of the remedial works (if required), a Phase 4 Verification Report (Validation Report) confirming the objectives, methods, results and effectiveness of all remediation works detailed in the Phase 3 Remediation Strategy shall be submitted to and agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority within 2 months of completion of the development.

Reason: To ensure that risks from land contamination to the future users of the land and neighbouring land are minimised, together with those to controlled waters, property and ecological systems, and to ensure that the development can be carried out safely without unacceptable risk to workers, neighbours and other offsite receptors in accordance with NPPF Part 11.

6. Notwithstanding the submitted information, development shall not commence until a report on detailed site investigations in relation to historic coal mining activity has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved report and any mitigation measures identified in the report shall be undertaken in accordance with the approved report.

Reason: In order to ensure the future stability of the site in accordance aims of the National Planning Policy Framework.

7. Notwithstanding any details of materials submitted with the application no development other than preliminary site excavation and remediation works shall commence until samples of the external walling and roofing materials have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall be constructed in accordance with the approved details.

Reason: In the interests of the appearance of the area and to comply with Policy GD1 of the Wear Valley District Local Plan.

8. Prior to the commencement of the development details of means of enclosure shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The enclosures shall be constructed in accordance with the approved details prior to the occupation of the dwelling to which they relate.

Reason: In the interests of the appearance of the area and to comply with Policy GD1 of the Wear Valley District Local Plan.

9. Development shall not commence until a detailed scheme for the disposal of foul and surface water from the development hereby approved has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority in consultation with Northumbrian Water. Thereafter the development shall take place in accordance with the approved details.

Reason: To prevent the increased risk of flooding from any sources in accordance with the NPPF. Page 15 STATEMENT OF PROACTIVE ENGAGEMENT

The Local Planning Authority in arriving at its decision to approve the application has, without prejudice to a fair and objective assessment of the proposals, issues raised and representations received, sought to work with the applicant in a positive and proactive manner with the objective of delivering high quality sustainable development to improve the economic, social and environmental conditions of the area in accordance with the NPPF. (Statement in accordance with Article 35(2) of the Town and Country Planning (Development Management Procedure) (England) Order 2015.

BACKGROUND PAPERS

- Submitted application form, plans, supporting documents and subsequent information provided by the applicant - The National Planning Policy Framework (2012) - National Planning Practice Guidance - Wear Valley District Local Plan - Evidence Base Documents - Statutory, internal and public consultation responses

Page 16 Proposed warehouse, office and showroom extension with associated external works and Planning Services change of use of land to vehicle storage Mr Barry Lloyd Lloyd Ltd, St Helen Way, St Helen Auckland, Bishop Auckland, DL14 9AX Ref: DM/16/02030/FPA This map is based upon Ordnance Survey material with the permission o Ordnance Survey on behalf of Her majesty’s Stationary Office © Crown copyright. Date Unauthorised reproduction infringes Crown copyright and may lead to 16th February 2017 prosecution or civil proceeding. Durham County Council Licence No. 100022202 2005

Page 17 This page is intentionally left blank Agenda Item 5b Planning Services COMMITTEE REPORT

APPLICATION DETAILS

APPLICATION NO: DM/16/03491/OUT Outline application for up to 17no. apartments with FULL APPLICATION DESCRIPTION: all matters reserved except access NAME OF APPLICANT: Mr G Burn and Mr S Webb Ceramic Tile Centre, 3 Union Street, Bishop ADDRESS: Auckland, DL14 7TB ELECTORAL DIVISION: Bishop Auckland Town Laura Eden Senior Planning Officer CASE OFFICER: 03000 263980 [email protected]

DESCRIPTION OF THE SITE AND PROPOSALS

The Site

1. The application site relates to an existing tile distribution warehouse of part single storey and part two storey construction that lies within a commercial sector just outside the boundary of Bishop Auckland town centre a identified by policy I10 of the Wear Valley District Local Plan (WVDLP) The surrounding area is largely within mixed usage with the town centre lying immediately to the west, leisure use to the north (including Grade II listed bingo hall) industrial uses to the east, residential properties to the south and a supermarket to the south east.

The Proposal

2 Outline planning permission is sought to demolish the existing building and redevelop the site for up to 17 no. apartments, with all matters except access reserved for future consideration. Indicative plans show that the units would be accommodated over four floors. Access to the site would be taken from the west off Dere Street/Union Street Rear and provision for no.11 under croft car parking spaces is intended.

3 This application is being reported to Planning Committee as it falls within the definition of a major development.

PLANNING HISTORY

4 A search of the Council’s planning register reveals there are no entries which are relevant to this planning application.

Page 19 PLANNING POLICY

NATIONAL POLICY:

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

6 The presumption in favour of sustainable development set out in the NPPF requires local planning authorities to approach development management decisions positively, utilising twelve ‘core planning principles’.

7 The following elements are considered relevant to this proposal;

8 NPPF Part 1 – Building a strong, competitive economy. The Government is committed to securing economic growth in order to create jobs and prosperity, building on the country’s inherent strengths, and to meeting the twin challenges of global competition and a low carbon future.

9 NPPF Part 4 – Promoting Sustainable Transport. Encouragement should be given to solutions which support reductions in greenhouse gas emissions and reduce congestion. Developments that generate significant movement should be located where the need to travel will be minimised and the use of sustainable transport modes maximised.

10 NPPF Part 6 – Delivering a Wide Choice of High Quality Homes. Local Planning Authorities should use evidence bases to ensure that their Local Plan meets the needs for market and affordable housing in the area. Housing application should be considered in the context of the presumption in favour of sustainable development. A wide choice of homes, widened opportunities for home ownership and the creation of sustainable, inclusive and mixed communities should be delivered. Where there is an identified need for affordable housing, policies should be met for meeting this need unless off-site provision or a financial contribution of broadly equivalent value can be robustly justified and such policies should also be sufficiently flexible to take account of changing market conditions over time.

11 NPPF Part 7 – Requiring Good Design. The Government attaches great importance to the design of the built environment, with good design a key aspect of sustainable development, indivisible from good planning.

12 NPPF Part 8 – Promoting Healthy Communities. The planning system can play an important role in facilitating social interaction and creating healthy, inclusive communities. Developments should be safe and accessible; Local Planning Authorities should plan positively for the provision and use of shared space and community facilities. An integrated approach to considering the location of housing, economic uses and services should be adopted.

13 NPPF Part 10 – Climate Change. Meeting the challenge of climate change, flooding and coastal change. Planning plays a key role in helping shape places to secure radical reductions in greenhouse gas emissions, minimising vulnerability and providing resilience to the impacts of climate change, and supporting the delivery of renewable and low carbon energy and associated infrastructure. This is central to the economic, social and environmental dimensions of sustainable development. Page 20 14 NPPF Part 11 – Conserving and Enhancing the Natural Environment. The Planning System should contribute to and enhance the natural and local environment by protecting and enhancing valued landscapes, geological conservation interests, recognising the wider benefits of ecosystems, minimising the impacts on biodiversity, preventing both new and existing development from contributing to or being put at unacceptable risk from pollution and land stability and remediating contaminated or other degraded land where appropriate.

15 NPPF Part 12 – Conserving and enhancing the historic environment. Local planning authorities should set out in their Local Plan a positive strategy for the conservation and enjoyment of the historic environment, including heritage assets most at risk through neglect, decay or other threats. In doing so, they should recognise that heritage assets are an irreplaceable resource and conserve them in a manner appropriate to their significance.

The above represents a summary of the NPPF considered most relevant the full text may be accessed at:http://www.communities.gov.uk/publications/planningandbuilding/nppf

LOCAL PLAN POLICY:

Wear Valley District Local Plan (WVDLP)

16 Policy GD1 - General Development Criteria - All new development and redevelopment within the District should be designed and built to a high standard and should contribute to the quality and built environment of the surrounding area.

17 Policy BE4 - Setting of a Listed Building - Development which impacts upon the setting of a listed building and adversely affects its special architectural, historical or landscape character will not be allowed.

18 Policy H3 - Distribution of Development - New development will be directed to those towns and villages best able to support it. Within the limits to development of towns and villages, as shown on the Proposals Map, development will be allowed provided it meets the criteria in Policy GD1 and conforms to the other policies of the plan.

19 Policy H15 - Affordable Housing - The Council will, where a relevant local need has been established, seek to negotiate with developers for the inclusion of an appropriate element of affordable housing.

20 Policy H22 - Community Benefit - On sites of 10 or more dwellings the local authority will seek to negotiate with developers a contribution, where appropriate, to the provision and subsequent maintenance of related social, community and/or recreational facilities in the locality.

21 Policy H24 - Residential Design Criteria - New residential developments and/or redevelopments will be approved provided they accord with the design criteria set out in the local plan.

22 Policy RL5 - Sport and Recreation Target - For every 1 hectare of land developed residential purposes, at least 1300 square metres of land should directly be made available on or off-site for sporting or recreational use as part of the development or developers will be expected to make a contribution to the provision of such facilities.

23 Policy T1 – Highways - Sets out that all developments which generate additional traffic will be required to fulfil Policy GD1 and; provide adequate access to the developments; not exceed the capacity of the local road network; and, be capable of access by public transport networks. Page 21 The above represents a summary of those policies considered most relevant in the Development Plan the full text, criteria, and justifications of each may be accessed at http://www.durham.gov.uk/article/3272/Wear- Valley-District-Local-Plan

RELEVANT EMERGING POLICY

The County Durham Plan

24 Paragraph 216 of the NPPF says that decision-takers may give weight to relevant policies in emerging plans according to: the stage of the emerging plan; the extent to which there are unresolved objections to relevant policies; and, the degree of consistency of the policies in the emerging plan to the policies in the NPPF. The County Durham Plan (CDP) was submitted for Examination in Public and a stage 1 Examination concluded. An Interim Report was issued by an Inspector dated 18 February 2015, however that Report was quashed by the High Court following a successful Judicial Review challenge by the Council. In accordance with the High Court Order, the Council has withdrawn the CDP and a new plan being prepared. In the light of this, policies of the CDP can no longer carry any weight. As the new plan progresses through the stages of preparation it will begin to accrue weight.

CONSULTATION AND PUBLICITY RESPONSES

STATUTORY RESPONSES:

25 Bishop Auckland Town Council – No comments received

26 Highways Authority – No objection on the basis that the under croft car parking is not converted to garages in the future and a condition is imposed to secure the renewal of the public footway surface to the eastern and southern site boundaries.

27 Northumbrian Water – No comments to make at this stage

28 The Coal Authority – Comments outstanding at the time the report was finalised. A verbal update will be provide at The Planning Committee.

INTERNAL CONSULTEE RESPONSES:

29 Planning Policy – The proposal is contrary to existing local plan policy i10. However the status of the local plan policies relating to the principle of development is such that the 2 limbed test set out in paragraph 14 of NPPF is triggered. The site has not been identified for retention as an employment site in the most up to date ELR. The scheme has the potential to deliver benefits in social and economic terms through the delivery of new housing including affordable housing on a brownfield site which is well related to local services, facilities and public transport.

30 Design and Historic Environment Section – It is considered that the site can be redeveloped without harm to the setting of the adjacent listed building. Appropriate details relating to matters such as scale, massing, design and materials can be agreed at reserved matters stage. As such there is no objection to this outline application.

31 Sustainability Officer – No objection given it relates to a brownfield site in a central location close to facilities and services. The standard sustainability condition should be placed on any approval.

Page 22 32 Affordable Housing – No comments received in relation to this application however it was previously advised that an affordable housing requirement of 10% would be expected across the site

33 Drainage and Coastal Protection Section – The additional information provided with regards to surface water management for the site is considered to be acceptable in principle. Further information will be required to support any subsequent reserved matters application.

34 Ecology – The location of the building means that the risk of roosting bats is very low therefore supporting information is not required to accompany the application.

35 Environmental Health (Contaminated Land) – Satisfied with the submitted report and its recommendations therefore suggests a condition is imposed requiring the submission of further information.

36 Environmental Health (noise) – No objections to the development on the provision that the noise amelioration measures are implemented as per the submitted report.

37 School Organisational Manager – There are sufficient primary and secondary school places to accommodate pupils from this development.

PUBLIC RESPONSES:

38 The application has been advertised by a press notice, on site and neighbouring residents were notified. No comments have been received.

APPLICANT’S STATEMENT:

39 None received

The above represents a summary of the comments received on this application. The full written text is available for inspection on the application file which can be viewed at: http://publicaccess.durham.gov.uk/online-applications/search.do?action=simple&searchType=Application

PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS AND ASSESSMENT

40 Having regard to the requirements of Section 38(6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 the relevant Development Plan policies, relevant guidance and all other material planning considerations, including representations received, it is considered that the main planning issues in this instance relate to the principle of development, infrastructure, heritage and visual impact, access and highway safety, impact on amenity of adjacent land users and future occupants, ecology, flooding and drainage issues and other material considerations.

Principle of development

41 The application site is located adjacent to Bishop Auckland town centre. Lying within the defined settlement limits, policy H3 of the Wear Valley District Local Plan (WVDLP) regards this as a suitable location for new housing development. The site also lies within the Commercial Sector of Bishop Auckland an area which has developed historically into a mixed use area where businesses have been established. Local plan policy i10 allows both business use and light industry (Use Class B1), general industry (Use Class B2) with storage and distribution (Use Class B8). The site is currently used as a tile distribution centre (use class B8).

Page 23 Notwithstanding the fact that the proposal accords with saved policy H3 it would lead to a residential use within the commercial sector contrary to policy i10.

42 With regards to policy H3, the local planning authority accept that WVDLP housing supply figures are based on historic information and as such are considered to be ‘out of date’ in the context of paragraph 49 of the NPPF. Furthermore, the County Council is currently unable to demonstrate a 5 year land supply.

43 Policy i10 provides a clear steer on the type of development that is acceptable in this location by indicating that within the [defined] commercial sector of Bishop Auckland, B1, B2 and B8 uses are permissible. It is however only partially consistent with national guidance in the NPPF & PPG because it states that other development which would increase traffic congestion should be resisted Paragraph 32 of the NPPF raises the bar significantly with only development resulting in a severe impact capable of being refused on transport grounds. Furthermore, from an employment land use point of view paragraph 22 of the NPPF states that planning policies should avoid the long term protection of sites allocated for employment uses if there is no reasonable prospect of the site being used for that purpose. It goes on to state that applications for alternative uses of land should be treated on their own merits with regard to market signals and the need for different land uses to support sustainable local communities. With this in mind an Employment Land Review (ELR) was undertaken and the current site was not identified as an employment area to be retained. This is a material consideration when considering the reuse of this site for other purposes. The fact that this policy is only partially compliant with NPPF reduces the weight that should be afforded to it.

44 Paragraph 14 of the NPPF states that 'At the heart of the National Planning Policy Framework is a presumption in favour of sustainable development' and for decision makers this means that where relevant policies are 'out of date' that planning permission should be granted unless any adverse impacts of doing so would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits when assessed against the policies the NPPF or specific policies within the NPPF indicate that the development should be restricted. Consequently, it is considered that in this instance, the proposal should be subject to the planning balance test as contained within Paragraph 14 of the NPPF. Clearly, whether any benefits of the proposed development are significant and demonstrably outweighed by adverse impacts can only be considered following an examination of all of the issues within the planning balance.

Heritage and Visual Impact

45 The site is located outside the Bishop Auckland Conservation Area but does directly adjoin the site of the Grade II listed bingo hall (former Hippodrome Theatre) and is within the setting of the designated asset. Nevertheless having reviewed the setting of the asset it is not considered that it is particularly sensitive to change as its significance derives largely from its intact architectural nature and its value as an example of this type of building

46 The area is otherwise characterised by variety in terms of style, scale and materials. The indicative plans suggest the scale and massing of the apartment building could be successfully integrated on the site without harm to the setting of the listed building and so that it appears to be subservient to the theatre building. The existing building does nothing to enhance the setting of the listed building therefore the replacement building should also have a neutral impact. Furthermore, the significance of this particular building does not derive from its setting. As such, subject to the appropriate detailing which would be agreed at reserved matters stage, no objection is raised by the design and conservation section. On this basis the proposal would Page 24 accord with policy BE4 of the WVDLP and Part 12 of the NPPF which seek to preserve the setting of listed buildings. The aforementioned policies and guidance requires the local planning authority to have special regard to preserving the setting of listed buildings or any special architectural or historic interest which it possesses in accordance with section 66 of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990.

Access and Highway Safety

47 The application seeks outline consent including access (not listed as a reserved matter). The indicative plans show that access to the site would be taken from the west off Dere Street/Union Street Rear and provision for no.11 under croft car parking spaces is possible to serve the potential 17 no. apartments. Whilst the highways officer has no objection to this proposed arrangement as the final site layout has not been determined it is not possible to agree the access at the outline stage. It is therefore listed in the conditions as a reserved matter.

48 The site lies within a mixed use area within walking distance of the bus station. The site is considered to lie within a sustainable location and this has been reflected in the reduced parking provision that has been agreed through pre-application discussions. On this basis the details provided are considered to be acceptable and no highways objection is raised. This is on the basis that the under croft car parking is not converted to garages in the future and a condition is imposed to secure the renewal of the public footway surface to the eastern and southern site boundaries.

49 Overall it is considered that the development would not adversely impact on the highway safety of the surrounding road network, while the details regarding highway layout, parking provision and accessibility could be controlled in any future reserved matters application. The proposal is therefore considered to comply with policies GD1, H24 and T1 of the Local Plan in this respect.

Impact on amenity of adjacent land users and future occupants

50 Policy H24 of the WVDLP sets out residential design criteria standards. With regards to distancing standards it recommended that there are 21 metre between walls of dwellings containing windows to habitable rooms and 15 metre distance between windowed elevations and opposing gable end walls. The proposed situation is somewhat different given that the site lies within industrial commercial area not immediately adjacent to residential properties therefore the aforementioned standards are not applicable. It is noted that the indicative layouts and floorplans show that windows to habitable rooms would most likely be positioned along the eastern elevations where there is a more open outlook. Given the site constraints, no significant concerns are raised at this stage in relation to privacy and it considered that acceptable arrangements could be agreed at reserved matters stage.

51 The site lies within close proximity of commercial premises therefore the application has been supported by both an odour and noise assessment. The environmental health section have assessed the submitted reports and conclude that there should be no adverse impact on the future occupants of the development from odour In terms of noise provided the noise amelioration measures are implemented as per the submitted report there should be no adverse impact on the future occupants of the development. A condition is recommended in this regard in addition to a construction management plan to protect the amenity of adjacent land users.

52 Both policies RL5 and H22 of the local plan seek to secure provision for sporting, social, community and/or recreational facilities. In this instance and given the site's Page 25 constraints it is considered appropriate to secure an offsite contribution of £1,000 per residential unit through a S106 Agreement which the applicant has indicated a willingness to enter.

53 A Phase 1 Contaminated Land Desk Top Study Report has been submitted in support of this application which makes recommendation for a Phase 2 Site Investigation. The contamination land officer is satisfied with the submitted report and its recommendations therefore suggests a condition is imposed requiring the submission of further information.

Ecology

54 Paragraph 11 of the NPPF and policy GD1 of the Local Plan requires that local planning authorities take into account, protect and mitigate the effects of development on biodiversity interests.

55 The Ecology Section have assessed the proposal. Given the location of the building the risk of roosting bats is considered to be very low therefore supporting information is not required to accompany the application. They have however advised that whilst supporting information has not been required there remains a residual risks of bats. An informative has been added in this regard.

Flooding and drainage

56 The NPPF requires that consideration be given to issues regarding flooding particularly from surface water run-off and that developments adequately dispose of foul water in a manner that prevents pollution of the environment.

57 Whilst concerns were originally raised by colleagues in the Drainage section the additional information provided with regards to surface water management for the site is considered to be acceptable in principle. Further information will be required to support any subsequent reserved matters application. Northumbrian Water have been consulted and have advised that they have no comments to make at this time.

Infrastructure

58 Saved Policy H22 of the Local Plan sets out that developments are required to contribute towards offsetting the costs imposed by them upon the local community in terms of related social, community and/or recreational facilities. There are sufficient primary and secondary school places to accommodate pupils from this development.

Affordable Housing

59 Local Plan Policy H15 sets out that where a relevant local need has been established the inclusion of an appropriate element of affordable housing will normally be required within a housing development. The NPPF also requires an element of affordable housing to be provided on housing sites as defined in an objective assessment of need in an up to date evidence base including a Strategic Housing Market Assessment (SHMA) and viability considerations. The County Durham SHMA supplies the evidence base for 10% affordable housing across the South of Durham Delivery Area (on sites of 15 dwellings/0.5 hectares). This would be secured via a S106 agreement.

Page 26 Other Issues

60 Planning plays a key role in helping to reduce greenhouse gas emissions providing resilience to the impacts of climate change, and supporting the delivery of renewable and low carbon energy and associated infrastructure. This is central to the economic, social and environmental dimensions of sustainable development as set out in the NPPF. The development would be expected to achieve at least 10% of its energy supply from renewable resources. This matter can be controlled by condition.

61 The application site falls within an area defined as being at high risk from former coal mining activity. The applicant has obtained appropriate and up-to-date coal mining information for the proposed development site and has used this information to inform the Coal Mining Risk Assessment Report contained within the Phase 1 Assessment. At the time of preparing this report comments are outstanding from the Coal Authority and a verbal update will be provided at the Planning Committee in this regard.

The Planning Balance

62 The acceptability of the application falls to be considered under the planning balance test contained within Paragraph 14 of the NPPF and therefore in order to justify the refusal of planning permission any adverse impacts of a proposed development need to significantly and demonstrably outweigh any benefits.

63 The Council cannot currently demonstrate a five-year supply of deliverable housing sites. As a result it is considered that weight should be afforded to the economic and social benefits of the additional housing supply and potential affordable housing contribution.

64 It is considered that there are a number of benefits associated with the scheme including the redevelopment of a brownfield site for housing including affordable provision in a sustainable location close to amenities and services. A financial contribution to be spent on recreational provision within the locality would also be secured. It is acknowledged that an existing business currently operates from the site however the ELR does not advocate the retention of the site. Whilst the proposal would bring a residential use into a predominantly commercial area it is considered any adverse impacts can be mitigated against. Finally, there are no objections from either the highways or design and conservation section. On this basis there are no considered to be any significant adverse impacts associated with the development.

CONCLUSION

65 The acceptability of the application falls to be considered under the planning balance test contained within Paragraph 14 of the NPPF.

66 In this instance the development would provide public benefits, the most significant of which would be the boost that the proposal would provide to housing supply, including affordable, on a brownfield site in a sustainable location. The existing business on site would relocate to more appropriate premises in the vicinity. Furthermore, a financial contribution would be sought for off-site recreational provision. No adverse impacts have been identified.

67 On balance, it is considered that the benefits of the development significantly and demonstrably outweigh any potential adverse impacts. It is not considered that there

Page 27 are material planning considerations which indicate otherwise therefore the application is recommended for approval.

RECOMMENDATION

That the application be APPROVED subject to the completion of a Section 106 Legal Agreement to secure financial contributions towards play and recreational facilities at a pro- rata rate of £1,000 per residential unit and the provision of 10% affordable housing; and subject to the following conditions;

1. Application for approval of reserved matters shall be made to the Local planning authority before the expiration of three years beginning with the date of this permission and the development must be begun not later than the expiration of two years from the final approval of the reserved matters, or in the case of approval on different dates, the date of approval of the last of the reserved matters to be approved.

Required to be imposed pursuant to Section 92 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 as amended by the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004.

2. Approval of the details of access, appearance, landscaping, layout and scale (hereinafter called "the reserved matters") shall be obtained from the local planning authority before the development is commenced.

Required to be imposed pursuant to Section 92 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 as amended by the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004.

3. The development hereby approved shall be carried out only in accordance with the approved plans, specifications and conditions hereby imposed.

Site Location Plan 02/11/2016

To define the consent and ensure that a satisfactory form of development is obtained in accordance with Policy GD1 of the Wear Valley District Local Plan.

4. Notwithstanding the details submitted, this permission relates to a maximum of 17 apartments on the site.

Reason: To define the consent and ensure that a satisfactory form of development is obtained in with policy GD1 of the Wear Valley District Local.

5. Prior to the commencement of the development a scheme to embed sustainability and minimise Carbon from construction and in-use emissions shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Thereafter the development shall be carried out in complete accordance with the approved scheme and retained while the building is in existence

Reason: To ensure that sustainability is fully embedded within the development as required by the NPPF.

6. Development shall not commence until a detailed scheme for the disposal of foul and surface water from the development hereby approved has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority in consultation with Northumbrian Water. Thereafter the development shall take place in accordance with the approved details. Page 28 Reason: To prevent the increased risk of flooding from any sources in accordance with the NPPF.

7. The development hereby permitted shall not commence until a scheme to deal with contamination has been submitted to and agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority. The scheme shall include the following, unless the Local Planning Authority is satisfied that the site is suitable for the proposed use and dispenses of any such requirements, in writing:

Pre-Commencement

(a) A Phase 2 Site Investigation and Risk Assessment is required and shall be carried out by competent person(s) to fully and effectively characterise the nature and extent of any land and/or groundwater contamination and its implications.

(b) If the Phase 2 identifies any unacceptable risks, remediation is required and a Phase 3 Remediation Strategy detailing the proposed remediation and verification works shall be carried out by competent person(s). No alterations to the remediation proposals shall be carried out without the prior written agreement of the Local Planning Authority. If during the remediation or development works any contamination is identified that has not been considered in the Phase 3, then remediation proposals for this material shall be agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority and the development completed in accordance with any amended specification of works.

Completion

(c) Upon completion of the remedial works (if required), a Phase 4 Verification Report (Validation Report) confirming the objectives, methods, results and effectiveness of all remediation works detailed in the Phase 3 Remediation Strategy shall be submitted to and agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority within 2 months of completion of the development.

Reason: To ensure that risks from land contamination to the future users of the land and neighbouring land are minimised, together with those to controlled waters, property and ecological systems, and to ensure that the development can be carried out safely without unacceptable risk to workers, neighbours and other offsite receptors in accordance with NPPF Part 11.

8. All sound attenuation measures detailed in the Noise Impact Assessment NT12823 Report No 2 dated October 2016 by Wardell Armstrong shall be fully implemented prior to the beneficial occupation of the development and permanently retained thereafter.

Reason: In order to prevent noise disturbance in accordance with Policy GD1 of the Wear Valley District Local Plan.

9. In view of the proximity of the proposed development to nearby residential premises the applicant shall prepare and submit a Construction Demolition Management Plan (CDMP) to the local planning authority for approval. The CDMP shall be prepared by a competent person and shall consider the potential environmental impacts (noise, vibration, dust, & light) that the development may have upon any occupants of nearby premises and shall detail mitigation proposed. This shall include:

Page 29 • An assessment of the potential for dust emissions from the site and the mitigation measures that will be used to minimise any emission taking into account relevant guidance such as the Institute of Air Quality Management “Guidance on the assessment of dust from demolition and construction” February 2014

• An assessment of the likely noise (including vibration) emissions from the site and the mitigation measures that will be taken minimise noise disturbance taking into account relevant guidance such as BS5228 ‘Code of practice for noise and vibration control on construction sites’ 2014.

• Where it is necessary to undertake piling on the site details shall be provided justifying the method of piling used so as to minimise disturbance, from noise and vibration, to the occupants of nearby premises.

• Details of the operating hours during which construction/demolition works are to be undertaken. Durham County Council’s accepted hours for construction/demolition activities that generate noise are 8am – 6pm Monday – Friday, 8am – 1pm Saturday and no noisy working on a Sunday or Bank Holiday.

•Detail of any planned measures for liaison with the local community and any procedures to deal with any complaints received.

•Details of whether there will be any crushing/screening of materials on site using a mobile crusher/screen and the measures that will be taken to minimise any environmental impact.

No works, other than site investigation works, shall be permitted to start on site until the CDMP has been submitted and approved in writing by the local planning authority. Once approved the development of the site shall be carried out in accordance with the approved Construction Demolition Management Plan.

Reason: In order to prevent noise disturbance in accordance with Policy GD1 of the Wear Valley District Local Plan.

9. Prior to construction commencement details of new footway construction at the eastern and southern site boundaries shall be submitted for approval. Such agreed details to be installed prior to first occupancy of the approved building.

Reason: In the interests of highway safety and to comply with Policy GD1 of the Wear Valley District Local Plan.

STATEMENT OF PROACTIVE ENGAGEMENT

The Local Planning Authority in arriving at its decision to approve the application has, without prejudice to a fair and objective assessment of the proposals, issues raised and representations received, sought to work with the applicant in a positive and proactive manner with the objective of delivering high quality sustainable development to improve the economic, social and environmental conditions of the area in accordance with the NPPF. (Statement in accordance with Article 35(2) of the Town and Country Planning (Development Management Procedure) (England) Order 2015.

BACKGROUND PAPERS

- Submitted application form, plans, supporting documents and subsequent information provided by the applicant Page 30 - The National Planning Policy Framework (2012) - National Planning Practice Guidance - Wear Valley District Local Plan - Evidence Base Documents - Statutory, internal and public consultation responses

Page 31 Outline application for up to 17no. apartments with all matters reserved except access Planning Services Mr G Burn and Mr S Webb Ceramic Tile Centre, 3 Union Street, Bishop Auckland, DL14 7TB Ref: DM/16/03491/OUT This map is based upon Ordnance Survey material with the permission o Ordnance Survey on behalf of Her majesty’s Stationary Office © Crown copyright. Date Scale Unauthorised reproduction infringes Crown copyright and may lead to 16th February 2017 Not to scale prosecution or civil proceeding. Durham County Council Licence No. 100022202 2005

Page 32 Agenda Item 5c Planning Services COMMITTEE REPORT

APPLICATION DETAILS

APPLICATION NO: DM/16/03932/FPA FULL APPLICATION DESCRIPTION: Change of use to single dwelling NAME OF APPLICANT: Mr Terence Race

George And Dragon Inn Boldron ADDRESS: Barnard Castle County Durham DL12 9RF ELECTORAL DIVISION: Barnard Castle West Tim Burnham Senior Planning Officer 03000 263963 CASE OFFICER: [email protected]

DESCRIPTION OF THE SITE AND PROPOSALS

1. The George and Dragon Public house sits within the Village of Boldron and is the only pub in the village. Boldron is a small village which sits to the south west of Barnard Castle (approximately 2 miles). The business consists of a pub with manager’s accommodation and two bedroom letting cottage.

2. The application proposes the change of use of the pub to a residential property.

3. The application is referred to Planning Committee by Cllr Bell due to local concern over the loss of the only pub in the village.

PLANNING HISTORY

4. There is no recent relevant planning history at the site

PLANNING POLICY

NATIONAL POLICY

5. The Government has consolidated all planning policy statements, guidance notes and many circulars into a single policy statement, the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF). However, the NPPF does not change the statutory status of the development plan as the starting point for decision making. Proposed development that accords with an up-to-date Local Plan should be approved and proposed development that conflicts should be refused, unless other material considerations indicate otherwise.

Page 33 6. NPPF Part 3 - Supporting a prosperous rural economy. Planning policies should support economic growth in rural areas in order to create jobs and prosperity by taking a positive approach to sustainable new development.

7. NPPF Part 4 - Promoting sustainable transport. Transport policies have an important role to play in facilitating sustainable development but also in contributing to wider sustainability and health objectives. Smarter use of technologies can reduce the need to travel. The transport system needs to be balanced in favour of sustainable transport modes, giving people a real choice about how they travel. However, the Government recognises that different policies and measures will be required in different communities and opportunities to maximise sustainable transport solutions will vary from urban to rural areas.

8. NPPF Part 8 - Promoting healthy communities. The planning system can play an important role in facilitating social interaction and creating healthy, inclusive communities. Local planning authorities should create a shared vision with communities of the residential environment and facilities they wish to see. To support this, local planning authorities should aim to involve all sections of the community in the development of Local Plans and in planning decisions, and should facilitate neighbourhood planning.

The above represents a summary of those policies considered most relevant in the Development Plan

LOCAL PLAN POLICY:

9. The following saved policies of the Teesdale Local Plan are relevant to the application; however, in accordance with paragraph 215 of the National Planning Policy Framework, the weight to be attached to relevant saved local plan policies will depend upon the degree of consistency with the NPPF. The greater the consistency, the greater the weight.

10. Policy GD1: General Development Criteria: All new development and redevelopment within the district should contribute to the quality and built environment of the surrounding area and includes a number of criteria in respect of impact on the character and appearance of the surrounding area; avoiding conflict with adjoining uses; and highways impacts.

11. Policy H10: Conversions Of Buildings To Residential Use The restoration or conversion of buildings to Residential use will be permitted within the development limits as shown on the proposals inset maps. Provided that the criteria listed in policy GD1 can be satisfactorily met and the conversion would accord with policy ECON. 3.

12. Policy ECON3: Conversion of Buildings and Land Currently in Employment Use Within the development limits of settlements shown on inset proposal maps the change of use or conversion of land or buildings from an employment generating use will not be permitted unless it meets at least one of the criteria, which among other things require there is no demand for the employment use.

13. Policy C2: Public House Change of use Proposals for change of use of public houses, where it is the last remaining public house in a settlement, will not be permitted except where it can be demonstrated that the use is no longer economically viable or required by the local community.

Page 34 The above represents a summary of those policies considered most relevant in the Development Plan the full text, criteria, and justifications of each may be accessed at http://www.durham.gov.uk/article/3271/Teesdale- Local-Plan

RELEVANT EMERGING POLICY:

The County Durham Plan

14. Paragraph 216 of the NPPF says that decision-takers may give weight to relevant policies in emerging plans according to: the stage of the emerging plan; the extent to which there are unresolved objections to relevant policies; and, the degree of consistency of the policies in the emerging plan to the policies in the NPPF. The County Durham Plan was submitted for Examination in Public and a stage 1 Examination concluded. An Interim Report was issued by an Inspector dated 15 February 2015, however that report was quashed by the High Court following a successful Judicial Review challenge by the Council. As part of the High Court Order, the Council has withdrawn the CDP from examination. In the light of this, policies of the CDP can no longer carry any weight.

CONSULTATION AND PUBLICITY RESPONSES

STATUTORY RESPONSES:

15. Highway Authority: No objection. A wall is proposed to the western side of the curtilage and no part of the new wall should be closer than 2.3m to the C164 carriageway edge.

16. Northumbrian Water: No objection.

PUBLIC RESPONSES:

17. The application has been publicised by way of site notice and neighbour notification letters. Letters of objection have been received from 10 addresses along with a letter of objection from CAMRA Darlington Branch. The main points of objection are summarised below;

 It is suggested that the proposed change of use is not in keeping with planning policy

 Concern is expressed over marketing process - asking price is too high to attract enquiries - channels through which property has been advertised are not wide enough

 Pub provides a focal and meeting point for the village playing host to sports teams and its loss would have a detrimental impact on the local community

 Concern over internal works that have taken place

 The community has interest in maintaining the pub as a going concern

18. Letters of support for the application have been received from two addresses. Points of support are summarised below;

Page 35  Business has been offered to community with little interest and has been for sale for a significant period of time

 Low patronage and high overheads have resulted in an unviable business

 Last four attempts to run the pub have failed

 Village hall can be used as alternative focal point for village

The above is not intended to repeat every point made and represents a summary of the comments received on this application. The full written text is available for inspection on the application file which can be viewed at https://publicaccess.durham.gov.uk/online-applications/

APPLICANTS STATEMENT:

19. Our planning application for change of use is based solely on the fact that despite our best efforts, over the 10 years we have owned the George and Dragon Inn, we have to accept it is not financially viable. This has been a very difficult decision for us to make and we would not have pursued this if we thought there was a viable solution to make the business a success. We are facing a precarious position as we are not able to maintain the level of monthly funding required from our personal finance to maintain the establishment on a non-profit basis. We both work independently to the business as there is no income derived from it and it has continued to make a significant loss every year.

20. We have tried and tested several strategies to maximise any business potential and maintain the presence of a pub in Boldron. This has included leasing the property out to a professional chef. Unfortunately, her business was declared insolvent in December 2013. We continued to be committed to the re-opening the pub. This required substantial investment and effort as the property had significant damage, no furniture and the license had lapsed. We re-opened in April 2014.

21. It is sad but true that the footfall of Boldron is limited and is a convenience to the handful of residents that visit the premises on a regular basis. Most inhabitants, and wider community, never use the pub. The pub has been up for sale, valued on a bricks and mortar basis, with full knowledge of the residents of Boldron for over 18 months. Despite a reduction in the asking price no interest has been forthcoming.

22. It is with great regret and sadness that we can confirm to the committee that our final day of trade was Monday 6th February 2017.

23. We thank the committee for their consideration of our application. If the decision is made in our favour this will have an enormous impact on our lives as it will give us the opportunity to develop what is an attractive and much loved property. We would leave our current home so that we could commit to this venture.

PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS AND ASSESSMENT

24. Having regard to the requirements of Section 38(6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004, the relevant Development Plan policies and all other material planning considerations, including representations received, it is considered that the main issue for consideration is whether the loss of the pub is warranted, having regard to its viability.

Page 36 25. The site lies within the development limits of Boldron where Teesdale Local Plan Policy H10 permits conversion of buildings to residential use provided the design and amenity criteria of Policy GD1 are met and the proposal accords with Policy ECON3 in respect of loss of any employment use on viability grounds. More specifically, Policy C2 seeks to prevent the change of use of a public house where it is the last remaining public house in a settlement, except where it is demonstrated that the use is not viable and appropriate marketing has been carried out. Policy C2 is therefore most relevant to this proposal and is consistent with NPPF paragraphs 28 and 70(b), which promote retention of valued local community facilities such as public houses.

26. Boldron is a small village of approximately 100 residents. The George and Dragon Inn and the village hall are the only community facilities in the village. The concerns expressed about loss of the only pub are therefore understandable.

27. The applicants purchased the pub in 2006 and ran it themselves offering drink sales, evening meals, Sunday lunch and letting rooms. They held quiz nights, live music and attempted annual events such as a hog roast, Halloween party, Mother’s day lunch and Christmas lunch to attract custom and boost sales. They also tried to join the local pool and darts league. But after 2 years of low patronage, coinciding with the effects of the smoking ban in 2007, opening was reduced to 5-6 days, and in 2009 evening meals were stopped. The account information shows that by 2009 the applicants had invested over £70,000 additional capital into the business to keep it going, but the business had experienced significant losses in each year of trading.

28. As a result of failing to turn a profit in any year for nearly 4 years, the applicant’s attempted to sell the business for £295,000 in 2009/10. They could not sell it, but managed to lease it to a chef with an option to purchase at a reduced price of £270,000 at the end of 3 years. However, in 2013 the applicants found that the leasee had vacated the premises unexpectedly and left it without fixtures and fittings, including the catering kitchen, and then filed for bankruptcy indicating continued failure of the business, despite having more of a food focus.

29. The premises was not operational or sellable in the condition it was left, and interest to run it on a co-operative basis didn’t materialise. It therefore required further investment to re-open in April 2014, with local volunteers helping to run it on a limited basis under a temporary license. A mobile restaurant was allowed to use the car park and customers were encouraged to bring their takeaway meals into the premises to eat with cutlery provided, but interest was short lived. The premises supported two quoits teams in the summer and a domino team in the winter, but only on one evening every fortnight for home games. Its role as a community facility was therefore very limited and not well supported.

30. The account information shows further significant losses since re-opening, which led to the business being advertised for sale again from June 2015. It remains on the market with a current list price of £235,000, which is a reduced price. It is noted that some local residents have questioned whether the premises has been properly marketed, but the selling agents are national specialists in selling pubs and leisure property, as were the previous agents in 2009. It has now been listed with them for a year and a half in which time they have mailed 7175 people and had 1248 direct enquires without any offers being made. In total it has been marketed for more than 2 years. Evidence suggests some local residents knew the pub was for sale and its plight has received local press coverage. The method and length of marketing is therefore considered to be appropriate.

Page 37 31. Members of the local community have made an application to list the pub as an Asset of Community Value (ACV), but this is a process which runs separately to planning legislation. Listing as an ACV would provide 6 months to allow a group to put together a bid to purchase the premises, but the owner would be under no obligation to accept the bid so it would not guarantee the retention of the pub. In any case, the pub is not currently listed as an ACV and there is no evidence that there is a group able to bid for and continue to run the pub on a viable basis. Accordingly, this issue should be afforded little weight in the decision making process. The village still has its own recently refurbished village hall for use by village societies and for events. It could host the sort of events that have taken place at the George and Dragon, which in recent years have been negligible, amounting only to hosting quoits and dominoes one night a fortnight and it is noted this was hosted elsewhere when the pub was closed previously.

32. On the basis of all the above, it is evident that there has been significant personal investment into the business and genuine attempts to make it successful. However, pub trade has suffered a collapse generally in recent years, partly because of the smoking ban, but also because supermarket and shop sales now account for almost half of the beer sold in the UK. In this case the village has a population of just over 100 and notwithstanding the pub has existed for a considerable period of time, the difficulty for such a small village to sustain a pub in the current trade environment is demonstrated by the pub’s failure to make a profit in any year the applicants have operated it. Even when the George and Dragon was operated for 3 years by a chef with a food-led focus, which is where small rural pubs tend to be more successful now, it ended with the leasee going into bankruptcy and the loss of essential fixtures and fittings putting the applicants to further major expense. Despite this, the applicants still re-opened, but they incurred further losses and have now closed the pub. There are other pub and eating establishments nearby in Barnard Castle, as well as The Unicorn in Bowes and Morritt Arms in Greta Bridge, which are larger and more accessible to the kind of passing trade that the George and Dragon would need to survive. This is likely to have contributed to the failed attempts to make the pub viable and would continue to do so because the village cannot sustain it by itself.

33. Thus, whilst the proposal would result in the loss of the only public house in the village it is considered that the loss of this public house would be warranted by considerations of viability with the evidence suggesting it has been appropriately marketed and has no realistic prospect of operating viably.

34. The premises is entirely suitable for re-use as a dwelling as it has in-curtilage parking, a garden and is located among other dwellings. It lies in the centre of the village and the facilities and services in Barnard Castle are just over 2 miles away so the location is not isolated having regards to NPPF paragraph 55. It is proposed to erect a wall to demark the curtilage adjacent to the highway, the precise details of which can be conditioned for further approval. There would be no harm to the character and appearance of the area or amenity of neighbouring properties.

35. Accordingly there is no conflict with Teesdale Local Plan Policies C2, H10, ECON3 and GD1.

CONCLUSION

36. Despite significant investment and genuine attempts to make the George and Dragon a success over a period of 10 years, the village has not been able to sustain its use as a pub and its use as a community facility has been very limited. It

Page 38 is therefore considered that the loss of this public house would be warranted by considerations of viability with the evidence suggesting it has been appropriately marketed and has no realistic prospect of operating viably.

37. A dwelling is an acceptable re-use of the premises and can be achieved without causing harm to the character and appearance of the area.

38. Accordingly there is no conflict with Teesdale Local Plan Policies C2, H10, ECON3 and GD1.

RECOMMENDATION

That the application be APPROVED subject to the following conditions;

1. The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of three years from the date of this permission.

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

2. The development hereby approved shall be carried out in strict accordance with the following approved plans and documents.

Proposed Elevation Plan Proposed Floor Plan received 08th December 2016

Reason: To define the consent and ensure that a satisfactory form of development is obtained.

3. No wall, fence, gate or other means of enclosure shall be erected along the roadside boundary without the details having first been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority and thereafter the development shall be retained as such.

Reason: In the interests of visual amenity and highway safety and to comply with Policy GD1 of the Teesdale District Local Plan

STATEMENT OF PROACTIVE ENGAGEMENT

In arriving at the decision to recommend approval of the application the Local Planning Authority has assessed the proposal against the NPPF and the Development Plan in the most efficient way to ensure a positive outcome through appropriate and proportionate engagement with the applicant, and carefully weighing up the representations received to deliver an acceptable development.

BACKGROUND PAPERS

Submitted application form, plans supporting documents The National Planning Policy Framework (2012) National Planning Practice Guidance Notes Page 39 Teesdale Local Plan The County Durham Plan (Submission Draft) All consultation responses received

Change of use to dwelling

Planning Services This map is based upon Ordnance Survey material with the permission 16th February 2017 of Ordnance Survey on behalf of Her majesty’s Stationary Office © Crown copyright. Unauthorised reproduction infringes Crown copyright and may lead to prosecution or civil proceeding. Durham County Council Licence No. 100022202 2005

Page 40 Agenda Item 5d Planning Services COMMITTEE REPORT

APPLICATION DETAILS

APPLICATION NO: DM/17/00080/FPA FULL APPLICATION DESCRIPTION: 5no. dwellings (including demolition of garages) NAME OF APPLICANT: Livin Garage Block, Armstrong Close, Newton Aycliffe, Co ADDRESS: Durham ELECTORAL DIVISION: Aycliffe East Mark O’Sullivan, Planning Officer, 03000 261056, CASE OFFICER: mark.o’[email protected]

DESCRIPTION OF THE SITE AND PROPOSALS

1. The application relates to 2no. blocks of terraced garage units (14no. units in total) and an adjacent grassed area located to the east of no’s 20, 22, 24, and 26 Armstrong Close, Newton Aycliffe. The site is surrounded by neighbouring residential properties and is accessed from the main road serving Armstrong Close to the west. Public footpaths bypass the site to the north, east and south linking neighbouring residential property and other areas of open space, most notably St Oswald’s Park to the north and smaller areas on St Oswald’s Walk to the south.

2. The site is owned by livin, who wish to demolish the 14no. garage units and construct 5no. 3 bed, 2 storey dwellings across the entire 0.1Ha site area (including grassland to the north). These dwellings would take the form of 4no. semi-detached units with drive space to the sides or front, and 1no. detached dwelling including attached garage space and drive to the front.

3. The application is being reported to the Planning Committee at the request of Cllrs Jed Hillary and Sarah Iveson, who express concern over the loss of green space, loss of parking and traffic issues.

PLANNING HISTORY

4. There is no relevant formal planning history relating to this particular parcel of land.

PLANNING POLICY

NATIONAL POLICY

5. The Government has consolidated all planning policy statements, guidance notes and many circulars into a single policy statement, the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF), although the majority of supporting Annexes to the planning policy statements are retained. The overriding message is that new development that is sustainable should go ahead without delay. It defines the role of planning in achieving sustainable Page 41 development under three topic headings – economic, social and environmental, each mutually dependent.

6. The presumption in favour of sustainable development set out in the NPPF requires local planning authorities to approach development management decisions positively, utilising twelve ‘core planning principles’. The following elements of the NPPF are considered relevant to this proposal;

7. Part 4 – Promoting sustainable transport. Transport policies have an important role to play in facilitating sustainable development but also in contributing to wider sustainability and health objectives. Smarter use of technologies can reduce the need to travel. The transport system needs to be balanced in favour of sustainable transport modes, giving people a real choice about how they travel. However, the Government recognises that different policies and measures will be required in different communities and opportunities to maximise sustainable transport solutions will vary from urban to rural areas.

8. Part 6 - Delivering a wide choice of high quality homes. To boost significantly the supply of housing, applications should be considered in the context of the presumption in favour of sustainable development.

9. Part 7 – Requiring good design. The Government attaches great importance to the design of the built environment, with good design a key aspect of sustainable development, indivisible from good planning.

10.Part 11 – Conserving and enhancing the natural environment. The planning system should contribute to and enhance the natural and local environment by minimising impacts on biodiversity and providing net gains in biodiversity where possible, contributing to the Government’s commitment to halt the overall decline in biodiversity.

LOCAL PLAN POLICY:

11.The development plan is the Sedgefield Borough Local Plan saved policies:

12.Policy D1 - General principles for the layout and design of new developments - requires the layout and design of all new developments to take account of the site’s relationship to the adjacent land uses and activities.

13.Policy D3 - Design for access - seeks to ensure new development makes satisfactory provision for all road users and pedestrians.

14.Policy D5 - Layout of new housing development - sets criteria for the layout of new housing developments.

15.Policy H17 - Backland and infill housing development - sets criteria for new backland and infill housing development.

16.Policy L5 – Safeguarding of areas of open space – sets criteria for the retention of areas of open space.

RELEVANT EMERGING POLICY:

The County Durham Plan

17.Paragraph 216 of the NPPF says that decision-takers may give weight to relevant policies in emerging plans according to: the stage of the emerging plan; the extent to Page 42 which there are unresolved objections to relevant policies; and, the degree of consistency of the policies in the emerging plan to the policies in the NPPF. The County Durham Plan (CDP) was submitted for Examination in Public and a stage 1 Examination concluded. An Interim Report was issued by an Inspector dated 18 February 2015, however that Report was quashed by the High Court following a successful Judicial Review challenge by the Council. In accordance with the High Court Order, the Council has withdrawn the CDP and a new plan being prepared. In the light of this, policies of the CDP can no longer carry any weight. As the new plan progresses through the stages of preparation it will begin to accrue weight.

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

The Great Aycliffe Neighbourhood Plan

18.Great Aycliffe Town Council has reached an advanced stage in the preparation of the Great Aycliffe Neighbourhood Plan (GANP), having undergone two statutory consultations and an independent examination. This emerging plan contains a number of policies which are relevant to this particular proposal. The ‘Report of the Independent Examination’ (the Report) recommends that the Neighbourhood Plan should, subject to the modifications recommended in the Report, proceed to Referendum. The County Council is currently considering the Examiner’s findings.

19.Paragraph 198 of NPPF states that where a planning application conflicts with a Neighbourhood Plan that has been brought into force, planning permission should not normally be granted. However, given the stage that the GANP has currently reached, it is not considered that the direction set out in Paragraph 198 is currently applicable. Furthermore, it cannot be regarded as forming part of the development plan at this point. This reduces the amount of weight that should be attributed to it. Notwithstanding this reduced status, it is now a material consideration in respect to development proposals falling within its geographic extent. The relevant policies and their implications in respect to the consideration of this proposal are set out later in this response.

CONSULTATION AND PUBLICITY RESPONSES

STATUTORY RESPONSES:

20.Great Aycliffe Town Council – Object to the proposals on the grounds of the loss of garages, loss of open green space and the precedent for future loss of open space which would occur if approved. Specific reference is made to conflict with the Great Aycliffe Neighbourhood Plan.

21.Highway Authority – No objections to the proposals.

22.NWL – Advise that the applicant develop their surface water drainage solution.

INTERNAL CONSULTEE RESPONSES:

23.Environmental Health (Contaminated Land) – Advise that given the potential for made ground / contamination on the site associated with the garages, and due to the fact that this development constitutes a change of use to a more sensitive receptor, a contaminated land condition should be applied to any approval.

24.Environmental Health (Noise) – Raise no objections. The information submitted demonstrates that the application complies with the thresholds stated within the TANS.

Page 43 This would indicate that the development will not lead to an adverse impact. The granting of planning permission may potentially result in a statutory nuisance being created during the construction phase given the proximity to residential properties. However it is considered that these concerns can be mitigated by controlling conditions on construction works.

25.Ecology Section – raise no objections to the proposals.

26.Spatial Policy Section - The loss of any off-street car parking provision and / or open space have the potential to give rise to harm. However, should the case officer be satisfied that in this particular case circumstances are such that the proposal will not give rise to a significant increase in on-street car parking that is prejudicial to residential amenity and/ or highway safety then there is no conflict with relevant planning policies in this regard and such harm may be negligible in the planning balance. Whilst the proposal conflicts with saved Policy L5 there are material considerations in terms of an emerging neighbourhood plan policy and OSNA findings that may justify lending support and therefore weighing favourably in the planning balance.

PUBLIC RESPONSES:

27.The application has been publicised by way of site notice and notification letters to neighbouring residents. At the time of preparing this report 34no. individual letters of objection have been received from local residents in addition to a 30no. named signed objection petition. The key areas of concern are summarised below:

Displacement of vehicles onto streets; Manoeuvrability/access issues for larger vehicles, refuse, emergency services; Proposed parking provision will unlikely support need; Livin deliberately let garages fall into disrepair; Loss of green open space and conflict with Great Aycliffe Neighbourhood Plan; Precedent of future loss of green open space within Great Aycliffe; Encroachment over access serving no.5 St Oswald’s Walk; Loss of privacy; Overshadowing of neighbouring property;

28.In addition, objections have also been received from the Great Aycliffe Residents Association who raise concerns over the loss of garages and subsequent displacement of vehicles, the deliberate intentions of livin to let these garages fall into disrepair, loss of green space contrary to the principles of the Great Aycliffe Neighbourhood Plan and the setting of a precedent for future green space loss.

APPLICANTS STATEMENT:

29.Livin Housing Limited (livin) as a Registered Provider of affordable housing, are required by the Homes and Communities Agency (the housing Regulator) to ensure it obtains value for money and utilises its assets to obtain maximum value for future investments.

30.Recently livin has completed a series of stock condition surveys on its entire garage portfolio. This has assisted livin’s Asset Management team to identify those garages having a negative Net Present Value (NPV) and therefore a liability to livin’s business plan. This information combined with investment requirements and demand data has been used to categorised the garage stock from high (high demand and good condition) to low (no demand and poor condition). This data is used to prioritise a programme of refurbishment and possible demolitions. During 2017/18 livin has committed £500,000 investment towards its garage stock to target long term priorities.

Page 44 31.Prior to any investment in garages, livin also consider if there is any future housing development potential of a site, including adjoining land holdings that meet a strategic housing need to assist in the targets required to meet the growth of new households. livin will consider homes for both affordable rent and affordable home ownership together with outright market sale for the purposes of generating cross subsidy to fund homes for affordable rent.

32.Armstrong Close is a garage block of 14no. garages (7no. currently void) with adjoining livin owned land, and is viable to redevelop with 5no. houses for a mix of intermediate and market sale, the receipts being used to cross subsidise new affordable homes elsewhere within County Durham.

33.Livin aim to relocate as many tenants displaced from any demolitions within the existing garages within the vicinity of the removed garage block or in the case of tenants of a livin home, will offer the option of in-curtilage parking if this is a feasible option.

The above represents a summary of the comments received on this application. The full written text is available for inspection on the application file which can be viewed at http://82.113.161.89/WAM/showCaseFile.do?action=show&appType=planning&appNumber=10/00955/FPA

PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS AND ASSESSMENT

34.Having regard to the requirements of Section 38(6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 the relevant Development Plan policies, relevant guidance and all other material planning considerations, including representations received, it is considered that the main planning issues relate to the principle of development, Scale/Design, Privacy/Amenity, Loss of open Space, Highways, Ecology and Land Contamination.

The principle of the development:

35.Saved policies H17 and D5 of the Sedgefield Borough Local Plan support new residential development on backland and infill locations where this can achieve a satisfactory means of access and parking provision, satisfactory amenity and privacy for both the new dwellings and existing adjacent dwellings, and where development is in keeping with the scale and form of adjacent dwellings and the local setting of the site. Given the age of the Sedgefield Borough Local Plan, its general housing supply policies are out of date and therefore carry little weight. In these circumstances the NPPF advises that developments should be approved unless any adverse impacts of doing so would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits when assessed against the policies of the NPPF as a whole.

36.The overarching principles of the NPPF seek to secure development in sustainable locations. Paragraphs 47- 55 of the NPPF seek to boost significantly the supply of housing to create sustainable, inclusive and mixed communities.

37.Newton Aycliffe is a Main Town, as identified in the County Durham Settlement Study. The application site lies in an established residential environment and has good links to the local amenities and services in the town. Five additional dwellings in this location would make a small contribution to housing supply (and social objectives). Given part of the site also constitutes brownfield land; its re-use is encouraged in the NPPF.

38.Visually, the existing garages do not contribute positively to the character and visual amenity of the area given their present condition and appearance. The concerns of the residents are noted that these garages have been left to fall into disrepair, although this is not a material planning consideration, particularly given they have been identified by Page 45 the owner as uneconomical to repair in the context of their business plan. The proposal would deliver economic, social and environmental benefits in accordance with the core principles of the NPPF and is considered acceptable in principle.

Scale / Design:

39.Part 7 of the NPPF and saved policies H17 and D1 of the Sedgefield Borough Local Plan seek to ensure good design in new developments, having regard to a sites natural and built features and the relationship to adjacent land uses and activities. Development should be in keeping with the scale and form of adjacent dwellings and the local setting of the site.

40.The application site is not located within any Conservation Area or area of special control.

41.Each of the proposed 5no. dwellings would be of 2 storey scale, commensurate to neighbouring two storey residential properties which surround the site. The semi- detached and detached building form would likewise reflect the development pattern of surrounding properties, flitting comfortably within the wider plot, not appearing as overdevelopment or cramped. Sufficient space would be left for private gardens to the rear (east), with off street parking and small garden areas to the front (west).

42.The dwellings would be of red and buff coloured brick construction with a brown sandtoft tile roof and white upvc windows which would complement surrounding building designs in the area, not appearing out of place or incongruous to their setting.

43.It is therefore considered that the proposed dwellings would be of a scale and design which respect their surroundings, thereby satisfying the principles of Part 7 of the NPPF and saved policies H17 and D1 of the Sedgefield Borough Local Plan.

Privacy / Amenity:

44.Saved policies H17, D1 and D5 of the Sedgefield Borough Local Plan together seek to ensure that new developments provide satisfactory amenity and privacy for new and existing adjacent dwellings. Supplementary Planning Guidance Note 3 sets minimum separation criteria between dwellings, requiring a minimum 21m distance between opposing windows of primary elevations and 14m between primary and gable elevations of neighbouring property.

45.The proposed dwellings would be west facing, maintaining a separation of 23m from the opposing principal east facing elevations of number 20, 22, 24 and 26 Armstrong Close. A single storey projection at no. 28 Armstrong Drive would fall within 17m of the principal elevation of proposed plot no.5; however this relationship is still considered acceptable, particularly given there would be no directly overlooking windows as a result. The main window in the opposing projection would directly overlook the side garden fence of plot no.5.

46.To the east, the proposed rear facing elevations of the 5no. plots would achieve a minimum 20m separation from the rear of no’s 5, 6, 7, 8 and 9 St Oswalds Court, increasing to 23m to the south. Again such separation is considered acceptable, particularly given the existing and proposed boundary enclosures which would effectively screen any ground floor windows, and the lack of directly overlooking windows.

47.To the north the blank gable elevations of proposed plot no.1 would face the blank gable of no.11 St Oswald’s Walk some 7.5m away beyond a public footpath. The blank south Page 46 facing gable of proposed plot no.5 would look out towards the rear facing elevations of no 7 St Oswald’s Walk some 14m away. Although this 14m is reduced in relation to the adjacent property (no.9 St Oswald’s Walk), this adjacent property is offset from the gable of proposed plot no.5 with no directly overlooking widows to result.

48.Means of enclosure (to be controlled by condition) would further help to maintain the privacy between existing and proposed neighbours with control over future extensions and outbuildings which may encroach into the aforementioned separation distances also recommended by conditions in the interests of residential amenity.

49.All proposed dwellings would occupy reasonably sized plots and benefit from reasonable private rear garden spaces commensurate to surrounding plots. The concern of a neighbour who questions whether development will impede access to their property is noted but this would not be the case.

50.With regards the amenities of neighbouring residents during the demolition and construction phases, although the Environmental Health section advise that some level of disturbance may result from site operations, this can be appropriately conditioned In terms of control over the timings of works so as to ensure the limitation of noise emission from the site during more sensitive hours.

51.In view of the foregoing, the proposed development is considered to satisfy the provisions of saved local plan policies H17, D1 and D5 and SPGNote3.

Loss of open space:

52.Saved policy L5 of the Sedgefield Borough Local Plan seeks to ensure that new developments which would result in the loss of an area of open space should be resisted. The proposal includes the development of a grassed area of some 600m2 (25m x 24m) to the immediate north of the 14no. garage units to be demolished.

53.The site contains no landscaping, trees or structures, and whilst it may have been used by local residents for some time on an informal basis, it is privately owned by the applicant and is not classified as designated open space within the Durham County Councils Open Space Needs Assessment (OSNA), or allocated as an area of Local Green Space within the Great Aycliffe Neighbourhood Plan. The applicant would be within their rights to restrict access onto this land at any time. For this reason it cannot be assumed that this privately owned plot is safeguarded for open space provision despite any current informal use.

54.In assessing its potential loss against the criteria of saved policy L5, it is accepted that the land does provide a small area of greenery within an otherwise enclosed residential street scene. However, the wider value of this land as open space is limited by its scale, current condition, close proximity to the garage bock and ownership.

55.Much larger areas of public open space are located in close proximity to the application site, particularly St Oswald’s Park located only 50m to the north of the site and accessed directly from this site via a short public footpath. Furthermore, similar areas of open space are located in equally close proximity to the south of St Oswald’s Walk and north west on Washington Crescent and Rufus Green. All of these areas are within a short walking distance from the site.

56.The Durham County Council OSNA identifies the site as falling within the Shafto St Mary’s ward (as of 2010) which concludes a surplus provision of amenity open space. Likewise the OSNA concludes that there is a surplus of amenity open space across the Newton Aycliffe settlement as a whole. Given the size of the grassland involved, this Page 47 land was not included within the OSNA calculations and therefore its loss would not impact upon this surplus.

57.Specific reference is made within the numerous objections to these proposals over the conflict with the emerging Great Aycliffe Neighbourhood Plan. Relevant policies of this plan are discussed in further detail below:

58.Policy GANP CH1 (Landscape Character and Townscape) requires that developments must respect the landscape character of the parish and its settlements in particular, new development should, where appropriate ensure green open space is provided within the development site to maintain the Beveridge ‘vision’ for the new town of Aycliffe. This policy has relevance to the consideration of whether the loss of the open space in question is acceptable in conjunction with saved Policy L5.

59.Policy GANP CH3 (Existing Amenity Open Spaces & Recreational Areas) states that existing open spaces, sports and recreational buildings and land, including playing fields and amenity open space not identified as a Local Green Space should not be built on unless an assessment has been undertaken which has clearly shown the open space, buildings or land to be surplus to requirements. In all cases, development undertaken must preserve and not detract from the character, heritage and appearance of the area and its surroundings. As demonstrated within the Councils Open Space Needs Assessment, there is a surplus of amenity open space across the Newton Aycliffe settlement and in particular the Shafto St Mary ward, with a notably large public park located only 50m to the north of the site and open amenity land of similar scale to the application site only a short walking distance to the south and north west. If approved, development would occupy a small, privately owned area of grassland of limited value owing to its scale, location, current condition and ownership, with its loss unlikely to detract from the character, or appearance of the wider area.

60.Policy GANP H1 (In-Fill Developments and Small Sites) states, amongst other things, that development will be supported on in-fill developments and small sites, providing that it is in proportion to the scale of the settlement, well-contained and respects the character and form of the locality. As indicated within the Scale/Design considerations section of this report, this is the case. The proposed development would result in a scheme which respects its residential surrounds, being of a scale and design which would not appear incongruous to its setting.

61.It is important to note that given the grassland is not defined as an area of Local Green Space within the Great Aycliffe Neighbourhood Plan, Policy GANP CH2 (Protection of Accessible Local Green Space Designations) is not relevant to the determination of this application.

62.Whilst it is acknowledged that there is some departure from the principles of saved policy L5 of the Sedgefield Borough Local Plan, it is concluded that the proposed works would not conflict with the principles of the wider objectives of saved policy L5 or those policies set out within the emerging Great Aycliffe Neighbourhood Plan. The principles of policy L5 are to safeguard areas of open space as a scarce resource given its vital function in a community. As explained, given its limited scale, condition, surplus provision of larger, far improved areas in extremely close proximity and ownership, any departure is limited and can be justified on this occasion.

63.Concerns have also been raised that the approval of this application would set a precedent for the future loss of open space areas across the settlement. However, each application is to be determined on its own merits against the relevant policies. For the reasons outlined above, the loss of this particular area of grassland is deemed acceptable. Such considerations may not necessarily apply to other open space sites. Page 48 Highways:

64.Saved policies H17 and D3 of the Sedgefield Borough Local Plan, and Part 4 of the NPPF require new development to achieve a safe and suitable access. NPPF paragraph 32 states development should only be prevented or refused on transport grounds where the residual cumulative impacts of development are considered to be severe.

65.Policy GANP T1 (Parking Impacts on Existing Infrastructure) of the emerging Great Aycliffe Neighbourhood Plan states that proposals that include a reliance on existing streets shall not be permitted where on-street parking would impact on the safety of road users or have an unacceptable adverse impact on the character of the area and adequate provision has not been made on-site for parking and access. This is a key issue that was identified through the public consultation that has been undertaken as part of the neighbourhood plan making process.

66.The potential loss of any off-street car parking provision is a legitimate concern as it could result in increased demand for on-street car parking on the existing public highway. The views of the highway authority have therefore been sought with regards the loss of 14no. existing garage units and the resulting potential for displacement of parked vehicles onto the public highway.

67.The applicant has confirmed that of the 14no. units to be demolished, only 7no. of these are currently occupied. The addresses of those 7no. occupants provided by the applicant indicate that 6no. of these are from the immediate surrounding houses on Armstrong Close and St Oswald’s Walk. The seventh occupant lives on Washington Crescent some 150m away.

68.Those being displaced as a result of the proposed works, and who are seeking alternative accommodation are being encouraged to contact livin about relocation to alternative garage blocks in the local area. Even in the event that a small number of vehicles are displaced from these garages into the immediate surrounding area, it is important to note that parking laybys do exist directly opposite the garage and which will be retained. These parking areas are not demarked but do provide space for approximately 6no. vehicles off the main highway without detrimentally affecting manoeuvrability through the site.

69.The applicant has previously supplied a copy of the correspondence sent to the local members, Councillors Iveson and Hillary (dated 27 October 2016), in which the livin business plan was referred to and is referred to as the Livin Asset Management Strategy on the latest submitted Existing Site Plan. The applicant has confirmed that the content of this letter remains the case in regards the current submission. In particular, this strategy raises the following points:

70.livin will consider the provision of in-curtilage parking for livin tenants displaced from any demolitions, or if available relocation to an alternative garage site if it is proved that the garage is used for the use of a vehicle and not storage. Private owner occupiers who rent a garage will be offered alternative garage sites if available, however no in-curtilage parking could be offered as this would be against livin’s charitable objectives. Should a decision be made to demolish a garage block and not redevelop that site, livin would also have any hard standings removed to remove any long term maintenance liabilities. It would not be our intention to provide off street parking in this situation as again this would be an investment issue going forwards with no financial income being received to fund on-going repairs.

Page 49 71.The offer to potentially compensate livin tenants for the loss of the garages is welcomed by the Highway Authority. The applicant has also confirmed the following:

72.In reality livin can terminate all garage licences with 1 week notice and without the need to provide any alternative parking provision. Also not all garage holders use the garages for parking but for storage provision. Garage blocks that are a liability on our business plan will be decommissioned regardless of new development and users displaced.

73.The comments outlined above which were relevant to the previous outline planning applications across Newton Aycliffe are deemed to be relevant in relation to this detailed planning application.

74.The Proposed Site Plan confirms that Plots 1-4 incl. would be served by 2no. on-site car parking spaces each, which would be deemed to comply with the minimum requirements outlined in the Durham County Council’s Residential Car Parking Standards. Plot 5 would support a 5.5m long driveway in conjunction with a good sized attached single garage with internal dimensions of approximately 3m x 6.2m, which is also deemed to be an acceptable level of on-site car parking provision.

75.The Proposed Site Plan also shows a 1.8m wide footway to be constructed on the western boundary of the site, abutting the carriageway in the public highway. The applicant would need to agree the construction specification for the 1.8 metres wide footway and the 3no. double width vehicular access crossings with the DCC Highways Adoption Engineer, along with the procedure for the adoption of same if the applicant wishes the footway/vehicular access crossings to be adopted on completion of the development. The applicant is to be reminded of such detail by informative.

76.Plans have also been amended to show an existing street lighting column which presently occupies the site to be relocated with the applicant also reminded by informative to contact the DCC Street Lighting Technician in this regard.

77.Subject to the applicant complying with the above there would be no highway objections to these proposals. There is no perceived conflict with policies H17 and D3 of the Sedgefield Borough Local Plan, and in accordance with NPPF paragraph 32, the residual cumulative impacts of the proposal on highway safety could not be classed as severe and therefore there are no justifiable reasons to refuse the proposal on highway safety grounds. For this reason, there is also no perceived conflict with the principles of the Great Aycliffe Neighbourhood Plan.

Ecology:

78. As the proposal involves demolition, regard must be given to potential impacts on bats, a protected species. In this case the garages are flat roofed and cold. As such, they do not represent suitable habitat for breeding or hibernating bats. The risk of disturbing bats or loss of habitat is therefore extremely low. Furthermore, there is no perceived ecological value to the adjacent grassland which also forms part of the application site. The Ecology Section has considered the proposals and have no objection. There is no conflict with the requirements of the Habitat Regulations and Part 11 of the NPPF.

Contaminated Land:

79. Part 11 of the NPPF seeks to ensure that new development is appropriate for its location, preventing unacceptable risks from pollution and land instability. Where a site is affected by contamination or land stability issues, responsibility for securing a safe development rests with the developer and/or landowner. Given the current use of the site for domestic garaging/storage it is very unlikely that there would be any significant Page 50 ground contamination and therefore it would be appropriate to leave this matter to a condition, as recommended by the Contaminated Land Section.

Planning balance:

80.Paragraph 14 of the NPPF details how Planning Authorities should approve development proposals which accord with the development plan without delay. Where the development plan is absent, silent or relevant policies are out-of-date; Planning Authorities should only grant permission where any adverse impacts of doing so would be significantly and demonstrably outweighed by the benefits.

81.The loss of a parcel of open grassland is regrettable. However this privately owned grassland is not designated as open space within the Authority’s Open Space Needs Assessment or Great Aycliffe Neighbourhood Plan. Taking into account its limited scale, condition, location adjacent to the highway, and the surplus of open space provision within close proximity to the site, its loss is not considered to significantly impact upon the identified surplus of open space across the settlement. The applicant retains overall control of this site.

82.Whilst the loss of 14no. existing garages units is likewise regrettable, these are privately owned and Livin have confirmed that they are to close in the near future as part of their business plan. As such, their ongoing viability for their original purpose is very much in doubt. Only 7no. of the garages are presently occupied with 1no. of these occupied by a resident located 150m away. At worst, the resulting displacement of vehicles onto the adjacent public highway would be limited and can be satisfactorily accommodated without resulting in any significant and detrimental highway impact. As explained, Livin will seek to support those who are displaced where assistance is sought.

CONCLUSIONS

83.The proposal represents a sustainable form of development that would deliver economic, social and environmental benefits in accordance with the core principles of the NPPF. 5no. dwellings could be satisfactorily accommodated onto the site without resulting in any form of overdevelopment or incongruous development form which would otherwise detract from the surrounding residential street scene.

84.The redevelopment of this privately owned site would result in a sympathetic form of development which would reflect the character, layout and density of the surrounding street scene without compromising highway safety, residential amenity, open space provision, ecology and land contamination. All representations have been carefully considered, however there have been no adverse impacts identified that would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits of the proposal when assessed against the policies of the NPPF as a whole, or the other relevant policies of the Sedgefield Borough Local Plan. In accordance with NPPF Paragraph 14 and the presumption in favour of granting permission in this case, the proposal is therefore recommended for approval.

RECOMMENDATION

That the application be APPROVED subject to the following conditions:

1. The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of three years from the date of this permission.

Page 51 Reason: Required to be imposed pursuant to Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 as amended by the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004.

2. The development hereby approved shall be carried out in strict accordance with the following approved plans: 2724-D-00-00 Rev A (Location Plan), received 09 January 2017 2724-D-00-002 Rev G (3 bed house type and elevations, Plots 1-4), received 13 January 2017 2724-D-00-005 Rev A (Street elevation), received 09 January 2017 2724-D-00-007 (Proposed site plan), received 09 January 2017 2724-D-00-008 Rev A (Plot 5 floor plans), received 13 January 2017 2724-D-00-009 (Plot 5 elevations), received 13 January 2017 Reason: For the avoidance of doubt and in the interests of proper planning.

3. Prior to the commencement of the development details of means of enclosure shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The enclosures shall be constructed in accordance with the approved details prior to the occupation of the dwelling to which they relate. Reason: In the interests of the visual amenity of the area and to comply with saved policies H17, D1 and D5 of the Sedgefield Borough Local Plan.

4. Notwithstanding the provisions of Class A, B, C, D, E, F and G of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995 (or any Order revoking or re- enacting that Order) details of any enlargement, improvement or other alteration to the dwelling(s) hereby approved and any buildings, including sheds, garages and glass houses to be erected within the curtilage of the dwellinghouse(s) shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: In the interests of the visual amenity of the area and to comply with saved policies H17, D1 and D5 of the Sedgefield Borough Local Plan.

5. No external construction works, works of demolition, deliveries, external running of plant and equipment shall take place other than between the hours of 0800 to 1800 on Monday to Friday and 0800 to 1400 on Saturday. No internal works audible outside the site boundary shall take place on the site other than between the hours of 0800 to 1800 on Monday to Friday and 0800 to 1700 on Saturday. No construction works or works of demolition whatsoever, including deliveries, external running of plant and equipment, internal works whether audible or not outside the site boundary, shall take place on Sundays, Public or Bank Holidays. Reason: In the interests of the residential amenity of neighbouring properties and to comply with saved policies D1 and H17 of the Sedgefield Borough Local Plan.

6. A Phase 1 Preliminary Risk Assessment (Desk Top Study) shall be carried out by competent person(s) and the results submitted to the Local Planning Authority before development commences, to identify and evaluate all potential sources and impacts on land and/or groundwater contamination relevant to the site.

If the Phase 1 identifies the potential for contamination, a Phase 2 Site Investigation and Risk Assessment is required and shall be carried out by competent person(s) before development commences to fully and effectively characterise the nature and extent of any land and/or groundwater contamination and its implications.

If the Phase 2 identifies any unacceptable risks, remediation is required and a Phase 3 Remediation Strategy detailing the proposed remediation and verification works shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority and thereafter carried out by competent person(s). No alterations to the remediation proposals shall be carried out without the prior written agreement of the Local Planning Authority. If Page 52 during the remediation or development works any contamination is identified that has not been considered in the Phase 3, then remediation proposals for this material shall be agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority and the development completed in accordance with any amended specification of works.

Upon completion of the remedial works (if required), a Phase 4 Verification Report (Validation Report) confirming the objectives, methods, results and effectiveness of all remediation works detailed in the Phase 3 Remediation Strategy shall be submitted to and agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority within 2 months of completion of the development.

Reason: To ensure that risks from land contamination to the future users of the land and neighbouring land are minimized and to ensure that the development can be carried out safely without unacceptable risk to workers, neighbours and other offsite receptors in accordance with NPPF Part 11.

STATEMENT OF PROACTIVE ENGAGEMENT

The Local Planning Authority in arriving at its decision have, without prejudice to a fair and objective assessment of the proposals, issues raised, and representations received, sought to work with the applicant in a positive and proactive manner. The Local Planning Authority have sought to ensure that this application has been determined within the statutory determination period.

BACKGROUND PAPERS

Submitted Application Forms, Plans and supporting documents National Planning Policy Framework Sedgefield Borough Local Plan Statutory response from the Highway Authority and NWL Internal responses from Ecology, Environmental Health and Contaminated Land

Page 53 5no. dwellings (including demolition of garages

Planning Services This map is based upon Ordnance Survey material with the Comments permission of Ordnance Survey on behalf of Her majesty’s Stationary Office © Crown copyright. Unauthorised reproduction infringes Crown copyright and may lead to prosecution or civil proceeding. Durham County Council Licence No. 100022202 2005 Date 16 February 2017

Page 54