Agenda and minutes

The Evacuation Procedure was noted.

There were no declarations of interest.

Consideration was given to the Minutes of the Planning Committee meeting which was held 6 March 2024 for approval and signature.

RESOLVED that the minutes be approved and signed as a correct record by the Chair.

The Planning Protocol was noted.

Consideration was given to planning application 22/1525/EIS Land At Seal Sands, Billingham.

Planning permission was sought for the erection of an energy recovery facility and associated infrastructure on Land at Seal Sands.

Permission was given for the erection of a 24MW energy facility including gasification technology on the 29th April 2013 (Application 12/2766/EIS). Work had commenced on site and the permission was therefore extant. The extant consent would process 175,000 tonnes of refuse derived fuel (RDF) annually to operate. The proposed development would require up to 240,000 tonnes of RDF annually to operate.

National and Local Policy documents and guidance had been reviewed and it was considered that the proposed development would assist in meeting the urgent need for renewable, sustainable, low carbon energy generation together with moving waste up the waste hierarchy and obtaining value from waste that would otherwise be exported for use or landfilled. In terms of social and economic benefits the development would create a significant investment with a value of over £500m, up to 200 jobs in the construction phase and up to 35 total full-time equivalent permanent jobs directly employed.

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 Offices report concluded that the Local Planning Authority had evaluated the Environmental Statement to ensure it addressed all of the relevant environmental issues and the information was presented accurately, clearly and systematically. The Local Planning Authority was satisfied that it had in its possession all relevant environmental information about the likely significant environmental effects of the project before it made its decision whether to grant planning permission.

In conclusion, it was considered the proposals did not give rise to any major concerns in terms of conflict with local planning policy and met national policy requirements.

There was no issue to suggest that the development would have a significant impact on ecology or traffic and transport. Other residual matters had also been examined and though a number of conditions would need to be imposed to properly control the development and its future operation, the proposal was considered acceptable.

In summary there were no sustainable land use planning reasons for resisting the development and it was recommended that the Members be minded to  approve the application with conditions for the reasons as specified within the main report with the final decision delegated to the Planning Services Manager once Natural England approved the appropriate assessment.

The Applicants Agent attended the meeting and was given the opportunity to make representation. Their comments could be summarised as follows:

. The application site was part of ‘Teesside Geen Energy Park Ltd’ and would be developed on a brown field site.

. It was recognised that the site would incorporate techniques for carbon capture using  ...  view the full minutes text for item P/5/24

Consideration was given to planning application 23/088/OUT Land off Stoney Wood Drive, Wynyard, TS22 5SN.

The site related to an approximate 0.6-hectare parcel of land off Stoney Wood Drive, Wynyard and lay on the edge of an existing and established residential area of Wynyard Woods, The Plantations. On the site was a segment of tall and established trees which provided a buffer between the site and the surrounding residential properties. The site was located within the red line boundary of 13/0342/EIS which was approved for approximately 500no homes; this development was now well underway and was established across the majority of the wider site.

Outline consent with all matters reserved was being sought for the erection of 2no dwellinghouses and detached garages. The 0.6ha plot would be subdivided into two segments and would be for the purposes of Self-Build properties.

The proposed development had been revised to a single point of access serving both dwellings (as opposed to two separate access points). Further alterations to the scheme included a diversion of a watercourse which previously ran through the site, now proposed to run adjacent to Stoney Wood Drive and the western boundary of the plots. Following the re-consultation on the revised proposal, there were no objections from any of the technical consultees. It was considered that the revised development had addressed the previous concerns, and the application was therefore recommended for approval subject to the conditions set out within the Officers report.

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 given the indicative drawings provided, it was considered that the proposal could satisfactorily accommodate the additional two dwellings within the site without affecting the character of the area, amenity of neighbouring residents or highway safety. It was recommended that the application be Approved with Conditions for the reasons as specified within the main report.

Members were presented with an update report which since the original report detailed condition number 6 (Buffer Landscaping) which had been updated. Full details of the revised condition were detailed within the update report.

In addition, correspondence had been received from the Wynyard Residents Association a copy of which was contained within the update report.

The comments received did not alter the original recommendation of approval with conditions and any issues raised had been addressed within the Officers update report.

An Objector attended the meeting and was given the opportunity to make representation. Their comments could be summarised as follows:

. The proposed site sat within the red line of the boundary and should remain green wedge.

. The site had previously received conditional permission for 500 houses ( application 13/0342/EIS) and although the current proposal related to only 2 houses, it impacted on  ...  view the full minutes text for item P/6/24

Consideration was given to planning application, 23/2192/X, Woodend Court, The Wynd, Wynyard.

Planning approval was sought for works to trees covered by a tree preservation order, which consisted of works to reduce the heights and general shape of a series of trees.

The proposed works had been considered by the Councils Principal Tree and Woodland Officer and overall it was considered that the works proposed were acceptable to ensure the safety and future health of the tree group.

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 application be recommended for Approval with Conditions for the reasons as specified within the main report.

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

. When applications were submitted for trees to be felled why could they not be taken down until October?

. Clarity was sought as to when this application had been received.

Officers were given the opportunity to respond to comments/issues raised. Their responses could be summarised as follows: -

. There was a standard condition to ensure the development confiormed to BS3998 and the requirements in relation to the timing of works.

. The proposed application was received by the Council in late November and was put formerly on the public register 19 December, Officers acknowledged that there had been a delay processing the application, however officers were working to clear the backlog.

. Standard advice had been brought out earlier in the year as Planning Officers appreciated there was a backlog of tree applications. Members requested more information on the new advice to share with residents.

A vote took place and the application was approved.

RESOLVED that planning application 23/2192/X be approved subject to the following conditions below;

1. Time Limit

The works hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of 24 months from the date of this permission.

2. Habitat and wildlife

As detailed in BS 3998:2010 Prior to work commencing, the tree and its surroundings should be assessed for the presence of protected species, some of which are subject to season-specific legislation. Any works should be planned so as to limit their potential adverse impact on wildlife generally. The timing of works should take account of the seasonal cycles of the species of fauna and flora concerned (including the nesting habits of birds and the egg-laying habits of insects).

3. Extent of Works

Permission is granted for the works as detailed in this approval. The crown reduction work should adhere to pruning mainly ‘soft growth’ eg under 75mm diameter, on the outer part of the tree crown to reduce overall height and spread but must not include removal of larger structural branches over  ...  view the full minutes text for item P/7/24

Members were asked to consider, note, and endorse the contents of a report ‘Local enforcement plan – planning guidance’.

Member heard that the Council had a statutory duty to investigate breaches of planning control although the decision on whether to act was nevertheless discretionary. Ensuring compliance with planning regulations was also considered to play an important role in safeguarding the policies of the Local Plan and achieving high standards of development across the Borough.

The NPPF (para 59) stated that effective enforcement was important to maintain public confidence and that local planning authorities should consider publishing a local enforcement plan “to manage enforcement proactively, in a way that is appropriate to their area”.

Additionally following last year’s scrutiny review of planning (development management) & adoption of open space, the agreed action plan (point 3) sought to introduce a local enforcement plan. A draft “Local Enforcement Plan” has been developed and this has been previously shared with CMT who supported the intention to introduce and ‘adopt’ the local enforcement plan.

The local enforcement plan did not have any legal status or formal adoption process, instead it was intended to provide guidance and increased transparency on the authority’s approach to how breaches of planning control would be processed with potential benefits being to help manage customer expectations and improve the overall customer experience.

Members were provided with a presentation which gave an overview of the following:

Prioritise and Waymarking

. Enforcement Prioritisation Categories

1. Emergency

2. High Priority

3. Low Priority

. Planning Enforcement Waypoints

4. Action and Priority Level

Expediency Test

. Planning Department assessment of a reported breach

Performance Monitors

.Service Standards

1. Response times to different categories of reported breach

2. Number of reported breaches received and determined per month.

3. How reported breaches had been received.

Categorisation Scores

. ENF categorisation lists

Priority Rating

. ENF Prioritisation table

. Risk Categories

The main topics discussed were as follows:

The plan was welcomed, and it was hoped that the backlog of reported breaches could be cleared asap.

More detail was requested to include details of breaches relating to demolition, conservation areas and Tree Preservation orders.

The process that was shared with the Committee did not form part of the planning enforcement plan; this was a general ethos in terms of how the Council dealt with planning enforcement. Breaches relating to trees went through a different process, however officers could look at including more detail.

Members felt it was important that they understood how the public would complete online forms to report breaches in order to help residents should they require it.

The process was based on a triage approach, assessing and prioritising allegations when they were submitted. Ideally residents should submit breaches online, where they would be asked a series of questions, where the alleged breach would be assessed against risk.

A motion was proposed and seconded that the item be deferred to provide Members with further planning committee engagement/training.

A vote took place, and the motion was carried.

RESOLVED  ...  view the full minutes text for item P/8/24

The Appeals were noted.