Issue - meetings

Prior to the meeting Members visited the site.

Consideration was given to planning application 22/2300/FUL, 12 Hartburn Village, Stockton-onTees, TS18 5EB.

Members originally considered the application at the Planning Committee meeting which was held on the 15th March 2023 however the application was deferred to enable the committee to consider additional information relating to public consultation and for a committee site visit to take place.

The neighbouring residents had made additional comments which were detailed within the main report.

The application site host dwelling was a detached Victorian period dwelling sited within Hartburn’s Conservation Area (covered by Article 4 Directions) in Stockton-on-Tees. The application sought planning permission for the replacement of an existing flat roof to a rear extension with a mono-pitch roof with the installation of a doorway to the existing extension. Revised plans were sought to change a hipped roof design to a mono-pitch roof to alleviate boundary concerns from neighbouring residents.

The applicant was an employee of Stockton-on Tees Borough Council, hence why the application was considered at Planning Committee.

The consultees that had been notified and the comments that had been received were detailed within the main report.

Neighbours were notified and the comments received were detailed within the main report.

The planning policies and material planning considerations that were relevant to the consideration of the application were contained within the main report.

The Planning Officers report concluded that the proposed extension by virtue of its scale, proportions, and design, was not considered to cause a detrimental impact to the character and appearance of the Hartburn Conservation Area or adjacent listed buildings/structures. Furthermore, in respect of residential amenity, the proposed extension did not cause a significant loss of amenity or privacy to neighbouring properties.

In view of the above, it was recommended that the application be approved subject to those conditions set out within the report.

Members were given the opportunity to ask questions / make comments. These could be summarised as follows: -

- concerns were raised about how consultations were carried out and if the wider community had been consulted as All Saints Church had not been included in the consultation in the first instance

- letters had also been sent out stating that officers were no longer conducting site visits due to COVID-19, however it was acknowledged the letter had now been amended

- there was an error on one of the drawings

- it was felt a condition was required to enable common access to be maintained at all times during the time period the works were to be carried out for All Saints Church and other neighbours

- assurances were sought that there would be no overshadowing in a neighbouring properties yard

- clarity was sought as to whether obscured glazing had been considered for the skylights in the roof

- officers were asked why a slate roof had not been conditioned to maintain the look of the group of cottages the property was part of.

 Officers were given  ...  view the full minutes text for item 62