Schedule -
Page 9
Item 1 -
Land at Hemlington Lane - Page 11
Item 2 - 3 Marton
Moor Road - Page 43
Item 3 -
Former Ormesby Methodist Church - Page 53
Minutes:
The Head of Planning submitted plans deposited as
applications to develop land under the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.
19/0355/FUL
Erection of 18 no bungalows with associated access and landscaping works at
Land at Hemlington Lane, Middlesbrough for Mr K
Shannon
Full details of the planning application and the
plan status were outlined in the report. The report contained a detailed
analysis of the application and analysed relevant policies from the National
Planning Policy Framework and the Local Development Framework.
The purpose of the application was to seek planning
consent for the erection of 18 bungalows with associated highway works,
landscaping and infrastructure on the area of land located to the east of Hemlington Lane in Middlesbrough.
The Development Control Manager advised that the
proposed density of the site had been reduced from the original 22 bungalows to
18 bungalows.
The site layout included a single vehicular
entrance into the site from the southern end of Hemlington
Lane. The layout proposed the dwellings and highway access be provided around
the central open space area. It was planned that the existing landscape strip
and established trees would be retained along the southern boundary of the
site, between the A174 and to the west of the site, between the existing
properties along Hemlington Lane.
The proposed development planned to provide
detached dormer bungalows that were considered to be a high-quality design and
which would reflect the existing mixture of house types within the
vicinity. The site layout had been
designed to provide properties focussed around a central open space with other
landscape strips to the rear of existing properties and around the site
entrance.
The site was designated green wedge within the
Local Plan and was contrary to the provisions of that policy, however,
consideration was given to the sites planning history. Members were advised that in 1993, an
application to use the land for residential development was refused by the
Planning and Development Committee, but was later allowed at appeal by the
Planning Inspectorate. In 2000 and 2015, outline permission had been granted
for residential development by the Planning and Development Committee. The
outline applications had provided no specific detail of the number of dwellings
and no conditions had been attached to the approval, setting out the number of
dwellings
Whilst all of the previous permissions had lapsed,
the matter of the site being in the green wedge had previously been considered
and it was envisaged that, due to the position of the site, its development
would not unduly affect the wider purpose of the designated green wedge.
Following consultation, a total of 11 objections
had been received from residents at 7 properties and an objection had also been
received from a Ward Councillor. The objections and concerns were based on a
number of matters, including the density of the development, the quality of the
development, impact on the character and appearance of the area, loss of green
space, impact on ecology and wildlife, traffic issues such as congestion and
highway safety, noise and traffic impacts during construction works and flood
related issues on the highway. There were no statutory objections to the proposal
in terms of the sustainability of the site or the ability to meet necessary
flood, ecology, highways and noise mitigation.
The principle of residential development had
previously been established through the three previous planning approvals for
the site. Although, the consent for the most recent 2015 outline scheme had
lapsed, the policies that had been applied to that application still remained
relevant policies now. Furthermore, there had been no changes in planning
policy since the 2015 approval had been granted.
Members were advised that, although the proposal
would result in the loss of an area of the green wedge, the physical separation
of the application site from the remainder of the green wedge allocation meant
it differed from other allocated green wedge areas. The application site was
segregated from the wider surrounding green wedge areas due to the position of
the adjacent highway network. It was therefore considered that the physical
separation of the site from the wider green wedge allocation, and the lack of
current linkage to the wider areas of green space, planned to prevent its loss
from having a detrimental impact on the overall wider integrity of the green
wedge area or compromise existing green links.
It was planned that the proposed development would
be accessed from Hemlington Lane with the internal
road layout being provided to adoptable standards.
Members were shown several images, illustrating the
site location, the proposed site layout and the proposed housetypes.
In summary, the analysis of the development had
determined that the proposals were for a sustainable development, which planned
to assist in economic growth in the town.
The proposed layout and dwellings were of a high-quality design and
planned to provide a pleasant and sustainable environment, offering a good mix
of dwelling types. Landscaped areas
within the site looked to enhance ecological potential.
The application site was allocated as green wedge
within the adopted Local Plan. Although
the dwellings conflicted with Policy E2, the segregation of the site from the
wider green wedge meant on balance the conflict with policy E2 did not outweigh
the social, economic and environmental sustainable benefits of the development.
Externally and internally, the proposed development
would meet both the 21 metre and 14 metre separation distances.
The officer recommendation was for approval,
subject to conditions and a S106 agreement for off-site provisions.
The Transport Development Engineer referenced objections
that had been raised in respect of the proposed access from Hemlington
Lane and the request for the creation of an additional spur from the
mini-roundabout into the site, similar to the Sandy Flatts
Lane Cul-de-sac access. It was commented that the introduction of an additional
fifth leg to the roundabout would have been impractical, given its size. With
the roundabout being on part of the strategic network, the creation of any
additional access or junctions needed to be avoided to ensure there were no
highway safety implications. Members were advised that there was an existing
access onto the strategic network that already existed in the form of Hemlington Lane, which presented a low level of vehicle
manoeuvring and good visibility splay. The proposed access met all the
technical requirements of the Tees Valley Design Guide and there was no lawful
reason to consider an alternative access.
It was commented that, in the interests of highway
safety, submission of a Traffic Regulation Order (TRO) would aim to reduce the
speed limit from 40 mph to 30 mph.
When analysing the impact of a proposal on the
highway network, vehicle trips in respect of each residential dwelling had been
taken into account. The scheme was estimated to generate approximately 14 two-way
vehicle movements, which was not significant and would not warrant refusal of
the application.
Highway works planned to include the provision of a
Toucan crossing point and designated right hand lane on Ladgate
Lane, and a proposed footpath along Hemlington Lane
to link the development to Ladgate Lane. The highway
works were considered to be an improvement to the existing highway arrangements
and would be funded by the Applicant and secured through legal agreements and
associated contributions.
A Member raised a query in respect of footpaths and
cycle links. In response, the Transport Development Engineer advised that the
proposal planned to provide a new footpath link along Hemlington
Lane and a crossing on Ladgate Lane to improve
footpath and cycle links to the site and existing properties along Hemlington Lane.
A Member queried whether the designated right hand
turn for Hemlington Lane was required. In response,
the Transport Development Engineer advised that, in the first instance, there
was a need to allow the junction to operate as planned. However, once in
operation, if problems were encountered in terms of traffic/congestion/road
safety, restrictions could be implemented and would need to be dealt with
outside of the planning process.
A Member raised a query in respect of reducing the
speed limit to 30 mph. The Transport Development Engineer advised that there
would be a targeted period of monitoring and enforcement.
A discussion ensued and Members expressed concern
that the submitted application proposed to remove the majority of the existing
trees within the site. It was also commented that the dense woodland would have
mitigated potential noise levels from the highway. It was advised that given
the proximity to Ladgate Lane, a 2.2 metre high
acoustic boundary fence was required along the northern and north-eastern
boundary to ensure there would be no noise impacts to future residents. Members
were advised that the acoustic boundary fence would be secured by a suitably
worded condition.
The Agent was elected to address the committee, in
support of the application.
In summary, the Agent advised that:
An Objector was elected to address the committee,
in objection to the application.
In summary, the Objector advised that:
A Ward Councillor was elected to address the
committee.
In summary, the Ward Councillor advised that:
A discussion ensued and Members expressed significant
concerns that the proposed development would involve destroying/clearing a
large area of woodland, which would negatively impact on wildlife and
biodiversity. To deliver a greener and healthier environment, the Council had
demonstrated a clear commitment to promoting biodiversity net gain. A Member
commented that the proposed scheme conflicted with what the Mayor and the
Council were trying to achieve and would not deliver measurable improvements
for biodiversity.
Members also expressed concern in respect of the
high density of the development and the proposed pedestrian and vehicular
access.
The Development Control Manager advised that the
findings of the ecological assessment, the subsequent badger sett survey, the
inclusion of the additional tree planting and landscaping within the site and
the S106 financial contribution for additional tree planting meant the proposed
development was not considered to have a significant impact on ecology. It was
also added that the s106 agreement would also secure financial contributions to
fund highway improvement works and provide affordable housing provision.
Members were advised that if approval was granted,
an additional condition was proposed to ensure the acoustic fencing was
installed and validated as successful.
Members continued to express concern, particularly
in respect of the negative impact the proposal would have on
wildlife/ecology/biodiversity and on residential amenity.
ORDERED that the application be Refused for the following reasons:
Loss of
Trees, Biodiversity and Ecology
In the
opinion of the Local Planning Authority, the proposed development would result
in the loss of a substantial amount of tree cover and associated biodiversity
and ecology, contrary to the National Planning Policy Framework 2021
(para.174d), Local Plan Policy DC1(e), CS4(j), and the Council’s Green
Strategy, which require impact on biodiversity and ecology to be minimised, for
biodiversity assets, wildlife species and green infrastructure to be protected,
and to sustainably manage and develop green spaces.
Impact
on Amenity of Surrounding residents
In the
opinion of the Local Planning Authority, as a result of the extent of
development being proposed and the associated movement of vehicles to and from
the development, the proposals would have an unacceptable adverse impact on the
amenities associated with surrounding properties through the change in
character of Hemlington Lane as a particularly small
grouping of properties within a cul-de-sac away from other residential
properties, thereby being contrary to Local Plan Policy DC1(c).
21/0109/FUL
Erection of detached domestic garage building to rear at 3 Marton
Moor Road, Middlesbrough for Ms Brodrick
Full details of the planning application and the
plan status were outlined in the report. The report contained a detailed
analysis of the application and analysed relevant policies from the National
Planning Policy Framework and the Local Development Framework.
The Development Control Manager advised that the
application site was a mid-terraced two storey residential property located to
the north side of Marton Moor Road. The application
proposed to remove the existing rear boundary which was made up of brick
pillars with roller shutter door and construct a detached, pitched roof
garage.
The property sat within a terrace of six on the
north side of Marton Moor Road. To the rear of the
property was a back lane with a church on the opposing side. The properties had
no vehicular access to the front, which was taken off the back lane to the rear
accessed via Rockwood Road.
No.3 (the application property) was the only
property within the terrace group without a garage to the rear.
Members heard that the scheme had been amended
since its initial submission, which had included a higher roof and an
additional floor with 2 windows within the 1st floor. The revised scheme reduced the height of the
proposed building to single storey.
The proposed garage building would be detached and
abut the rear lane as per the other garages serving this group of terraced
properties. The garage was shown having
a pitched roof and although that was contrasting with the other garages in the
immediate vicinity, it accorded with the principles of the Middlesbrough Design
Guide which in general did not support flat roofed additions.
Seven objections had been received from three
properties, which mainly related to the scale of the building, its close
proximity to the adjacent properties, the resultant loss of light and the
general overbearing impact.
Members raised queries in respect of the size and
positioning of the proposed building. In response, the Development Control
Manager advised that the dimensions of the proposed garage were 5.46m by 5.5m
and a maximum height (from ground level) of approx. 4.17m and eaves height of
2.3m. The scale, design and materials proposed were appropriate to the site
location and there would be no demonstrable adverse impact on adjacent
residential amenity.
It was considered that the proposal would not cause
notable harm to the amenities of the neighbours or the appearance of the
dwelling or the surrounding area and was of a design which was in keeping with
the host property. The officer recommendation was for approval.
The Agent was elected to address the committee, in
support of the application.
In summary, the Agent advised that:
A discussion ensued and Members commented that the
scale and design were appropriate for the site location and there were no
material planning considerations that would warrant refusal of the application.
ORDERED that the application be Approved on Condition for the reasons
set out in the report.
21/0480/VAR
Variation of condition no. 5 of planning approval 20/0045/COU to remove the
condition which requires external windows in the north west
elevation to remain closed between the hours of 9am to 9pm at Former Ormesby Methodist Church, High Street, Middlesbrough TS7
9PA for Mrs Woodgate
Full details of the planning application and the
plan status were outlined in the report. The report contained a detailed
analysis of the application and analysed relevant policies from the National
Planning Policy Framework and the Local Development Framework.
The Development Control Manager advised that
planning permission was sought to remove condition No.5 attached to planning
approval 21/0045/COU, which granted permission for the use of the former church
to be a dance studio. Condition 5 related
to windows on the northwest elevation, which were required to be closed to
prevent undue disturbance to surrounding residential amenity in lieu of any
evidence demonstrating it would not cause harm.
The main consideration of the application was whether
or not there was sufficient evidence to demonstrate the opening of the windows
could occur, whilst the dance school was operational, without having an undue
impact on nearby neighbours in terms of noise and disturbance.
Consideration had been given to a technical report
submitted with the application and noise monitoring carried out by the
Council’s Environmental Health Department. It had been concluded that the
opening of windows could occur without having a significant increase in noise
levels or impact in terms of noise and disturbance on local residents. In view
of those findings, it was recommended that approval be granted to remove
Condition 5.
A Member queried whether noise levels, at the site,
could be monitored for an initial period of three months. The Head of Planning
made reference to Condition 3 - noise mitigation on request. Members were
advised that if complaints were received from neighbouring properties, in
respect of the noise levels, the Applicant would be required to submit a scheme
of mitigation to the Local Authority. In the event that an agreed scheme was
not implemented, within 4 months of the initial request, all amplified sound at
the premises would cease until an agreed scheme was implemented. If noise
levels were deemed unacceptable by local residents, Condition 3 would be
triggered, enabling the Council to monitor the levels beyond an initial period.
Evidence submitted with the application
demonstrated that there was no significant difference in noise levels at the
site with windows open. The findings of the noise report were verified by the
Council’s Environmental Health Department, the removal of the condition would
not unduly impact the amenity of local residents.
ORDERED that the application be Approved on Condition for the reasons
set out in the report.
Supporting documents: