Issue - meetings

The Chairman of the Planning Committee agreed to hear the officers report and member debate in relation to items 26/1069/RET and 26/1070/ADV as both items related to the same site.

The Planning Officer outlined planning application 26/1069/RET, Lidl, Billingham Road, Norton Application which sought retrospective planning permission for the installation of 4no ANPR cameras to existing lighting columns. The Planning Officer also outlined planning application 26/1070/ADV Lidl, Billingham Road, Norton which sought retrospective advertisement consent for 13no non illuminated pole mounted signs and 2no non illuminated wall mounted signs.

Planning application 26/1069/RET sought retrospective planning permission for the installation of 4no ANPR cameras to existing lighting columns.

Application 26/1069/RET had been assessed in full and it was not considered that the scheme had an adverse impact on the character of the area or wider conservation area/listed buildings, nor did it impact on neighbours’ privacy and amenity.  All material considerations had been considered in full and there were no valid reasons to refuse the application.

Planning application 26/1070/ADV sought retrospective advertisement consent for 13no non illuminated pole mounted signs and 2no non illuminated wall mounted signs.

Application 26/1070/ADV had been assessed in full against material planning considerations and there were no adverse impacts on the amenity of the surrounding area or implications for highway and pedestrian safety that would warrant refusal of the application. 

The consultees that had been notified and the comments that had been received were detailed within the main reports of both applications.

 Neighbours were notified and the comments received were detailed within the main reports both applications.

For planning application 26/1069/RET the planning officers report concluded that it was not considered that the proposed APNR cameras had a significant adverse impact on the conservation or wider area or on immediate neighbours and it was not considered that the scheme was unacceptable, therefore in view of the considerations set out within the main report, the application was recommended for approval with conditions.

For planning application 26/1070/ADV the planning officers report concluded that the signage accorded with Local Plan policies and with the SPD on Shop Front Design and Advertisements and with guidance contained within the National Planning Policy Framework (2026) and therefore the application was recommended for approval subject to conditions.

Objectors attended the meeting and were given the opportunity to make representation. Their comments could be summarised as follows:

- The Committee were urged not to treat the application as a retrospective "tidying up" exercise and argued that it required proper scrutiny before any decision was made.

- Concerns were raised about what was described as a wider national trend whereby parking enforcement infrastructure and signage were installed before the necessary planning permissions were obtained, with retrospective applications submitted afterwards. This made it particularly important that the Committee carefully examined the proposal rather than simply regularising works that had already taken place.

- It was argued that the application should not be rubber-stamped and that additional information was required before a decision was reached. A request was  ...  view the full minutes text for item 42