Agenda item

Consideration was given to planning application 24/0336/VARY Land at Harrowgate Lane, Bishopsgarth, Stockton on Tees.

The application site (hereby referred to as the Site), was located to the western edge of Harrowgate Lane, its 13.41 ha formed somewhat of an ’L’ shape. It was referred to as Zone C within the West Stockton Sustainable Urban Extension.

Planning permission was sought under Section 73 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 to vary the approved plans of outline permission, ref 14/2291/EIS to enable the access to the site to be moved further north along the eastern site boundary. The application was required as there was a highways safety conflict with the location of the approved site access.

Whilst this application, could technically be determined under delegated powers in line with the Councils Scheme of Delegation, it had been brought for determination by Members given the association with application ref 21/0249/REM, which was required to be determined by Members of the Planning Committee.

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

Neighbours were notified and any 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 considerations contained within the main report the proposed development was considered to be visually acceptable, and it was not considered that the proposed development would have any adverse impacts on levels of residential amenity, character and visual or highway safety. The proposed scheme was therefore in accordance with the relevant local and national planning policies and was recommended for approval subject to those conditions outlined within the main report.

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

- The applicants agent fully supported the officers recommendation and sought the support of the Planning Committee.

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

- Questions were raised relating to the temporary construction access to the development site and whether that would be superseded by the proposed new access.

- It was highlighted that as there would now be 4 accesses to the building sites on Harrowgate Lane it was important that these were kept clean, to mitigate against the impact on neighbours from large construction vehicles spitting mud on the local road network.

- Comments were made relating to highway junction improvements particularly those around the Horse and Jockey public house on Durham Road, as it was believed that the intended improvements to those highway junction improvements had been taken out of the capital programme. Officers were asked what the intended improvements would be, and costs associated and when they would be delivered as Harrowgate Lane was like a dirt track with temporary traffic lights impacting traffic flow which needed clearing up.

- It was important to residents that the necessary infrastructure was delivered to ease commuting to and from home. Residents in and around the Harrowgate Lane area were suffering daily with the mud and mess. It was requested that a delivery programme be presented at the next Planning Committee meeting of when the highways junction improvements would come forward.

- Reference was also made regarding highways issues for those commuters coming from Ingleby Barwick and Thornaby, particularly for those that would normally use the route via the 2 Mile House junction to North Tees Hospital, having to now detour to miss that junction. It was therefore felt that the highways junction improvements needed to be initiated before any further development.

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

- It was confirmed that there would still be temporary access to the south of the development. The main access however would be located to the north of the site based on safety grounds.

- Officers explained that there was a condition on the original application which would mitigate against issues relating to mud from construction vehicles spilling onto the local road network.

- In terms of highway junction improvements, officers reminded Members that this was an application to vary the access to the site moving it further north along the eastern site boundary. The Planning Inspectorate had already approved everything else. Officers did however refer Members to page 20 of the agenda pack which highlighted the locations for highway junction improvements, and which were identified on the master plan. The improvements would be funded from S106 contributions. Phase 2 would fund Yarm and Darlington Back Lane towards the Horse and Jockey, however there was still part of the West Stockton development that was not yet approved. Where reference had been made regarding the capital programme, advice would need to be sought from a senior finance director.

- The Head of Legal Services explained that the questions relating to highways junction improvements were not relevant to determine this application. There would be a plan of works however and officers would endeavour to give some response as far as they could.

A vote took place and the application was approved.

RESOLVED that planning application 24/0336/VARY be approved subject to the following conditions and informatives below;

Approved Plans

01 The development hereby approved shall be in accordance with the following approved plans;

Plan Reference Number                 Date Received

5205 - 275 Rev A.                            7 January 2025

Scope of the Consent

02 This permission relates solely to the variation of condition 01 of application ref. 14/2291/EIS with regards to the location of the means of access only and does not in any way discharge or remove any of the remaining conditions attached to application 14/2291/EIS which shall still be complied with.

Tree Protection

03 Notwithstanding the proposals detailed in the Design and Access Statement/ submitted plans no development shall commence until an Arboricultural Method Statement and Tree Protection Plan is approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. This must be in close accordance with:

1.BRITISH STANDARD 5837:2012 Trees in relation to design, demolition and construction – Recommendations

2.BRITISH STANDARD 3998:2010 Tree Work - Recommendations

3.NJUG Guidelines For The Planning, Installation And Maintenance Of Utility Apparatus In Proximity To Trees (Issue 2) - Operatives Handbook 19th November 2007

Any such scheme agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority shall be implemented prior to any equipment, machinery or materials being brought to site for use in the development and be maintained until all the equipment, machinery or surplus materials connected with the development have been removed from the site.

INFORMATIVE OF REASON FOR PLANNING APPROVAL

Informative: Working Practices

The Local Planning Authority has worked in a positive and proactive manner and sought solutions to problems arising in dealing with the planning application by seeking a revised scheme to overcome issues and by the identification and imposition of appropriate planning conditions.