Planning and Development Committee s3

Planning & Development Committee 21 April 2006

PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE

A meeting of the Planning and Development Committee was held on 21 April 2006

PRESENT: Councillor McPartland (Chair), Councillors Brunton, Ferrier, McTigue, Rooney and

Sanderson

OFFICIALS: V Flynn, A Hughes, B Roberts and E Vickers.

**ALSO IN ATTENDANCE: Councillors Davison and Lowes

**DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST – M/FP/0333/06/P – Councillors McPartland and Rooney

M/GRG/0417/06/P – Marton Grove Primary School

**APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE were submitted on behalf of Councillors Bloundele, Ismail, McIntyre

and Mrs B Thompson

**MINUTES

The Minutes of the meeting held on 31 March 2006 were submitted and approved as a true record.

NOTED

PLANS

The Head of Planning and Regeneration Programme submitted plans deposited as applications to develop land under the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 and the Head of Development Control reported thereon.

ORDERED that the following applications be determined as shown: -

M/FP/0283/06/P – Demolition of existing buildings and proposed mixed use scheme comprising 2 No. retail units, hotel, parking and landscaping at the former North Riding Infirmary site, Newport Road for Aldi Limited.

Deferred pending a site visit.

M/OUT/0354/06/P – Outline planning permission for 1 No. detached dwellinghouse on land to the side of 3 Thornton Road, Thornton for Mr T Saunders.

Withdrawn.

M/FP/0378/06/P – Demolition of centre, canopy, kiosk/office and erection of 2 half storey blocks – 5 No. units with apartments/parking and stores at Middlesbrough Van Centre, 288-292 Acklam Road for Mr D Taylor.

Deferred pending a site visit.

M/FP/0540/06/P – Two storey extension over existing ground floor and additional car parking at Cleveland College of Art and Design, Green Lane for Cleveland College of Art and Design.

Deferred pending a site visit.

FORMER PLUMB CENTRE, ROMAN ROAD, LINTHORPE – DISCHARGE OF PLANNING CONDITIONS.

As all consultations had not taken place, it was agreed that this item be deferred.

Deferred.

M/FP/0323/06/P – Change of use of ground floor to 2 No. Self-contained residential units and single storey extension to the side and rear of 98 Clarendon Road for Mr Safa.

Details of the plan status and planning history were outlined in the report.

The Head of Planning and Regeneration Programme advised Members that this application had been deferred at the last meeting pending a site visit. Accordingly a site visit had been held prior to the meeting.

Neighbourhood consultations had taken place and objections received from the Tees Area Residence Group, and the comments from Transportation, Street and Land Services and Environment were included in the report.

Members were advised that a revised plan had been submitted, changing the access arrangements for refuse removal.

A detailed analysis of the application was also included in the report.

The applicant was present and elected to address the committee.

Reasons for Recommendation

The application was acceptable as it was in accordance with Section 38 (6) of the Planning & Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 and the policies of the Middlesbrough Local Plan E1, including SPG.

Members of the committee had undertaken a site visit and were fully conversant with the configuration of the application premises and could assess the benefits of the revised proposals showing access into the rear alleyway.

Approved on condition that (i) the development shall only be carried out using finishing materials of which samples had been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority prior to commencement of the development (ii) the development hereby approved shall be carried out in complete accordance with the plans and specifications received on 19 April 2006 and shall relate to no other plans. (Reasons as detailed in the report).

** DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST – Councillors McPartland and Rooney both declared a personal interest in the following item, in that they had prior knowledge of the objector to the application. However, legal advice confirmed that they were permitted to take part in the consideration of the application.

M/FP/0333/06/P – Demolition of offshoot to rear, single storey extension to front, part two/part single storey extension to rear and conservatory at 53 Heythrop Drive, Acklam for W Ryder.

Details of the plan status and planning history were outlined in the report.

Full details of the proposal were included in the report.

Neighbourhood consultations had taken place and objections received from the occupiers at No. 55 Heythrop Drive on the grounds that it was an open development of the site, it would be intrusive and imposing and leave the occupants with a loss of amenity and daylight would be blocked from the room at the side of the house and the landing.

A detailed analysis of the application was also included in the report.

The applicant was present and her representative elected to address the committee.

Refused on the grounds that (i) the proposed development would be in conflict with Policy E1 and HO14 of the Middlesbrough Local Plan by way of the detrimental impact on the amenity of the adjoining and adjacent occupiers (ii) the proposed development was considered to be unacceptable as a result of its size and design and would introduce a dominating and oppressive built form to neighbouring properties and also to the detriment of their amenities.

M/FP/0274/06/P – Single storey dining room and a W.C./utility room extensions at rear at 349 Acklam Road, Acklam for Mrs S Bullivant.

Details of the plan status and planning history were outlined in the report.

Full details of the proposal were included in the report. Members were reminded that a previous application for a two storey extension at this address had been refused. However, the applicant had reduced the size of the extension and permission was granted under the ‘permitted development’ rule. The current application, therefore, referred only to a rear lounge extension and a small w.c./utility room extension.

Neighbourhood consultations had taken place and objections received from the occupiers of No. 347 and 351 Acklam Road, full details of which were included in the report.

A detailed analysis of the application was also included in the report.

The applicant was present and elected to address the committee. Objectors were present and the Chair permitted both to speak within the allocated time. Councillor Lowes, as Ward Councillor, was also present and addressed the committee to object to there being further development at this property.

Refused on the grounds that (i) the proposed dining room and w.c./utility room were considered to be unacceptable having regard to the oppressive and overpowering affect they would have on the adjoining occupiers in addition to the affect the extensions may have on daylighting to the neighbouring properties, all of this to the serious detriment of the amenity of those neighbours (ii)

the extensions would be contrary to Policy E1 in the Council’s Local Plan, being in conflict with test (i) external appearance and test (ii) affect on the amenities of occupiers of nearby properties.

M/FP/0433/06/P – Single storey extension to front and part two-storey/part first floor extension to rear at 42 Yearby Close, Acklam for Mr and Mrs D A Carr.

Details of the plan status and planning history were outlined in the report.

Full details of the proposal were also included in the report.

Neighbourhood consultations had taken place and one letter of objection was received from the occupier of No. 40 Yearby Close who objected that the development would be overbearing and lead to a loss of light for the front of that property, that the open aspect of the area would be ruined, and that the applicant had been asked to amend the plans but had declined to do so.

A detailed analysis of the application was also included in the report.

An objector was present and elected to address the committee.

Reason for Recommendation

This application was satisfactory in that the design of the proposed extension accorded with the principles of National Planning Policy (Planning Policy Statement 1) and local policy requirements (Policy E1 and HO14) of the Council’s Local Plan.

The extension would not impact negatively on the surrounding properties. The neighbouring property is sufficiently removed from the proposal so that any impact on the property would not be significant. The living room and bedroom windows of 40 Yearby Close were far enough removed from the rear extension and were positioned in such a way that the proposal would result in a minimal loss of light.

The application was therefore considered to be an acceptable form of development, fully in accordance with the relevant policy guidance and there were no material considerations, which would indicate that the development should be refused.

Approved on condition that (i) the development shall only be carried out using finishing materials of which samples have been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority prior to commencement of the development. (Reasons to ensure the use of satisfactory materials).

M/FP/0394/06/P – Retrospective front boundary wall and gates at 379 Acklam Road, Acklam for Mr Guzmics.

Particular reference was made to the Middlesbrough Local Plan Policy E1.

Members were advised the subject of this application was a residential property and the application was for a retrospective boundary wall and gates at the front of the property. The boundary wall was built using sandstone blocks in a random pattern and the maximum height of the wall was 1.8 metres and the lowest height of the wall was 1.2 metres and the wall was built in an undulating pattern.

Consultations had taken place and objections received from the occupiers of Nos. 381 Acklam Road and 436 Acklam Road on the grounds that the wall was too high and the shape was inappropriate and the materials used did not blend with the usual red brick walls and houses on Acklam Road, it restricted the view of oncoming traffic and there was a height restriction to one metre to front boundary walls on Acklam Road.

A detailed analysis of the application was also included in the report.

The Ward Councillor, Councillor Lowes was present and spoke in objection to this application. An objector was also present and addressed the committee.

ORDERED that this application be refused and that Enforcement Action be authorised on the grounds that (i) the proposed wall was considered a discordant feature within the street scene and as such detrimental to the visual amenities of the area (ii) the development was contrary to Policy E1 in the Council’s Local Plan, being in conflict with test (i) ‘external appearance’ and test (ii) ‘effect on the environment and amenities of occupiers of nearby properties’.

M/FP/0036/06/P – Erection of 4 No. Bio-reactors, 3 No. fan set units and 1 No. 12 metre high exhaust stack at Unit 1, Queensway East, Middlesbrough Industrial Estate for APL Technologies Limited.

Members were advised that the application site was located on the East Middlesbrough Industrial Estate and the existing factory process involved the screening of car body parts. Further details of the proposal were also included.

Two representatives from Environmental Services were present and advised the committee on the function and operation of bio-reactors.

Neighbourhood consultations had taken place and an objection received from the occupier at 134 Low Lane, who was the owner of a property adjacent to the western boundaries of the application site, on the grounds that the application was wholly inappropriate for a residential area and that the area was not zoned for such an industrial use. Comments from Transportation and Community Protection were also included in the report.

A detailed analysis of the application, with particular reference to policies EM1 and E1 of the Middlesbrough Local Plan were also included in the report.

The agent was present and briefly addressed the committee.

Reasons for Recommendations

This application was satisfactory in that the design of the proposed development accorded with the principles of National Planning Policy (Planning Policy Statement 1) and local policy requirements (Policy E1 and EM1) of the Council’s Local Plan.

The proposed design and appearance of the bio-reactors was considered appropriate to its surroundings and its use will be beneficial to local and residential amenities. Issues of traffic, vehicular access and car parking had been fully considered and found to be satisfactory.

The application was therefore considered to be an acceptable form of development, fully in accordance with the relevant policy guidance and there were no material considerations which would indicate that the development should be refused.

Approved on condition that (i) before any fixed plant and machinery, including extraction fans and pumps, is used on the premises it shall be enclosed with sound insulating material and mounted in a way which would minimise transmission of airborne and structure borne sound in accordance with the scheme to be approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority (ii) any floodlighting as part of the proposed development shall be erected and operated in a manner compliant which the scheme to be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority before the proposed use commences. (Reasons as detailed in the report).

M/OUT/0256/06/P – Demolition of existing house and associated building and redevelopment to form 26 No. flats in a 3.5 storey block at 35 Park Road South for Mr A Whalley.

Details of the plan status and planning history were outlined in the report.

Full details of the proposal were included in the report. Members were reminded that previous applications had been considered which provided for the retention of the former dwellinghouse and redevelopment of the garden area for residential purposes. This outline application proposed the demolition of the existing former dwellinghouse and the development of a new apartment block comprising of 26 apartments, which extended across the whole width of the site.

Consultations had taken place and an objection had been received from the occupier of 37 Park Road South on the grounds that the development would have an adverse impact on the quality of life and there would be additional traffic and people disturbance problems. Members were also advised that the applicant had submitted a letter in support of the application and this was attached to Appendix 1 of the report. Comments from Transportation, Community Protection, Streetscene, Landscape, Middlesbrough Prevention Design Adviser and the Council’s Conservation Officer were included in the report. The objections received from the Community Council were reported verbally at the meeting.