Agenda item

Outline application including means of access for the erection of up to 190 dwellings.

The Committee considered a report of the Senior Planning Officer regarding an outline application including means of access for the erection of up to 190 dwellings on land at the east of Moss Close Farm, Pelton (for copy see file  of Minutes).

S Pilkington, Senior Planning Officer, gave a detailed presentation on the application which included a site location plan, aerial image, views across the site and an indicative masterplan.

The Senior Planning Officer informed the Committee that additional letters of objection had been received and there were now 54 letters of objection and 21 letters of support.

Councillor Bill Barrett of Urpeth Parish Council addressed the Committee to object to the application.

It was important to emphasise that the development fell within the geographical boundaries of Urpeth parish.  Parish Councillors were extremely annoyed and disappointed that the Parish Council and the residents it served had not been given the same level of explanation or consideration that Pelton Parish Council or residents living in Pelton Lane Ends and Newfield had been afforded.  Two consultation events were held that neither Urpeth Parish Councillors nor residents were invited.

The applicant first attended a Parish meeting at Urpeth on 15 November 2016 where they explained their plans to progress an outline planning application, which would include details of proposed house types on the site.  At that point the Parish Council requested a percentage of bungalows be provided, approximately 15 in total.  The applicant at that stage was proposing 6, which was more than currently being proposed.  At the close of the meeting the Parish Council was advised that once the finer details regarding the layout of the development had been agreed a further meeting would be arranged would be arranged with Parish Councillors to discuss proposals in more depth.  The Council was also advised at this point that the outline application would be submitted in February/March 2017 when in fact this happened in December 2016.

The applicant did not come back to a Parish meeting until February 2017.  It was subsequently agreed that Lewis Stokes would attend the March meeting to discuss the application further as there were still many unresolved issues.  Unfortunately after the meeting in March there were still areas of concern that could not be answered by Mr Stokes and the Parish Council respectfully asked the applicant to defer the application until June, to enable those concerns raised to be addressed to be addressed and for full consultation to be undertaken with Urpeth Parish residents.  It should be noted that Mr Stokes at that meeting acknowledged that the consultation had not been undertaken as widely as it should or could have been.

The Parish Council and many residents were concerned that the applicant would not be developing the site should permission be granted.  This would be a choice which the landowner could make to sell to any building company he chose and this caused great concern given the potential for further involvement of Persimmon in the area.

In conclusion the Parish Council respectfully requested the Committee to defer the application until unresolved issues had been resolved and further consultation with Urpeth residents been carried out.

Councillor Joyce Roberts of Pelton Parish Council addressed the Committee in support of the application.  Ms Roberts informed the Committee that she was also Chair of the Chester le Street and District Business Association and Pelton lane Ends Residents Association and a governor of Roseberry Primary School. All of which were supportive of this application.

The development site was a short walk to the shops within Pelton and residents of the development would help support local business.  Pelton Community Centre, which was near to the proposed development, was a well-used facility and its use could increase if this development was approved.  The development was easily accessible from the roundabout on the A693, and would provide a new cache of pupils for the Roseberry Primary School.

The applicant had attended meetings of the Pelton Parish Council and had kept local residents well informed of the application.

Councillor J Cordon, local Member was not able to attend the meeting but had submitted his comments as follows, which were read out to the meeting:

‘This important planning application for another 190 houses in Pelton certainly has my backing, even if I reside only a few hundred metres from the building space.

The Banks Group have responded well to community briefings, having appeared before Pelton Parish Council and Newfields Residents Association.  They have been well received here in the local area, having explained their plans to us.

I would hope our Planning Committee could agree imposing work-start and finish times, as well as prohibiting big work vehicles from using Pelton Lane and the village as an entrance/exit route to and from the building site, protecting our Community Primary School and shopping area.  The low bridge below the church should help ensure this though.  There is an entrance to the building site from the A693. 

We plan to establish a liaison group to monitor events during the construction phase, and, with goodwill from both sides, the minimum of fuss, mainly noise and muck, can be achieved.  We need more houses for our people to live in.

This designated area has been earmarked for housing for a long time, and we need to crack on.

Councillor Batey, local Member, addressed the Committee as a representative of local residents.

The proposed development was situated within Urpeth Parish whereas consultation had taken place within Pelton Parish.

While Councillor Batey was under the impression that residents in the near vicinity were largely in favour of this proposed development due to comments made by Pelton Lane Ends and Newfields Residents Association this was not the case.  Councillor Batey informed the Committee that she had been contacted by numerous individuals, particularly after the publication of a second article in the Chester le Street Advertiser and the Northern Echo which had caused outrage particularly as the title implied local residents were in favour.  This had not been helped by those organisations supporting the application benefitting from grants from the Banks Community Foundation after the outline planning application had been submitted.

There had been a significant number of accidents on the stretch of road leading from the modified roundabout at Pelton and Perkinsville up to the Newfield roundabout.  Significantly there had been two accidents that had been graded as severe on 20 January 2012 and 11 September 2015.  While these accidents took place prior to the modifications at the Newfield roundabout there was a significant risk that increased traffic flow would seek alternative routes including West Pelton at Greens Bank junction which had a fatal accident on 29 March 2016.  Additionally, traffic seeking a route to the A1(M) northbound was likely to use the unclassified road from Baytree Terrace to Urpeth.

It was also significant that when the new roundabout was being installed the impact was major traffic congestion at the Pelton/Perkinsville roundabout.  Phase 1 of the Persimmon development was not yet completed and Phase 2 not yet commenced, and it was therefore impossible to predict how many additional vehicles would travel on this stretch of road or what the impact was likely to be.  Site traffic for two potential developments in an area that has in excess of 23,000 vehicle journey’s also needed to be considered.

Another area of concern was the impact of the development on local health services.  In most localities it was anticipated there would be adequate primary healthcare provision to cater for projected population change.  However, last Friday evening a local GP commented that problems with appointments were exacerbated by recruitment issues.  This was acknowledged by North Durham CCG who stated in their General Practice Forward View Implementation Plan that one of the challenges facing primary care within North Durham was the ability to attract high quality general practitioners into the area and GP recruitment was proving very difficult.  Taking this into consideration it was highly likely that a development of this size would place significant demand on already under pressure service.

The Chester le Street Plan referenced retaining the Green Belt and would protect the setting of Ouston/Urpeth Grange and prevent the coalescence of Perkinsville, Pelton, Beamish and High Handenhold.  A 2015 planning application for the erection of a single 4 bedroomed dwelling and two outbuildings on land to the east of Ravenscroft, Stoney Lane, Beamish was rejected on the grounds that the proposed dwelling ‘causes harm to the openness of the Green Belt, and contrary to the reasons of including the land within Green Belt without the benefit of very special circumstances, contrary to Policies NE4 and NE5 of the Chester le Street Local Plan’, and Part 9 of the NPPF.

Residents were extremely concerned about the availability of secondary school places as both Kevin Jones MP and Councillor Batey were dealing with cases where parents had not been granted either first or second choices of secondary schools.  This site was only 400 yards from the site of the former Roseberry Secondary School that was closed and subsequently demolished.  Both Chester le Street schools, Hermitage and Park View were oversubscribed by 50 children for each school, along with Lord Lawson a Gateshead school attended by other Urpeth children.

The Urpeth Parish Council had requested Banks to defer to the June Committee for this application to be considered because it was considered that letter s of opposition would materialise.  However, nobody expected the strength of feeling and tension the Chester le Street Advertiser article would create.

Councillor Batey asked the Committee to consider the number of controversial developments in the local area, the goodwill of residents had reached saturation point.  A site visit for this application had not been undertaken and given the number of objections this would have been advisable, especially regarding the concerns in relation to road infrastructure.  Councillor Batey asked the Committee to defer the application until a site visit could be arranged.

·Mr Lewis Stokes, Community Manager at the Banks Group addressed the Committee in support of the application.

The application site was sustainable and the Banks Group was experienced in bringing forward projects such as this.  The site had social and economic viability and had been identified for housing in the previous County Durham Plan.

There were no technical reasons to refuse the application.  The Banks Group had met and listened to local people and had attended meetings of both Urpeth and Pelton Parish Councils as well as holding 5 public consultation events at two locations.  It was pleasing that Councillor Cordon had supported the application.

The design of the development would promote walking and cycling and would provide 15% affordable housing, over £250,000 towards open space and sports provision in the area, a new cycle link to connect to the Coast2Coast cycle route and £1.8m new homes bonus.

The Senior Planning Officer responded to the issues raised as follows:

·         The location of Green Belt land was to the north of this development site and to the south was green field land, not Green Belt.

·         Chester le Street Local Plan Policies had limited weight

·         The NHS had confirmed that local buildings could accommodate additional demand which would bring additional revenue and funding schemes

·         The school placement manager had advised that there was sufficient primary and secondary capacity, including North Durham Academy

·         The recently received letters of objection raised no issues which were not already addressed within the report.

Councillor Jewell referred to school places.  Many applications considered by the Committee received information from the schools places manager that there were sufficient places in an area, yet local residents contradicted this.  He asked where the s106 money would be spent to help the community as the wider community was split between Urpeth and Pelton.  The proposed development would bring with it some bungalows which were often asked for and there was a need for housing in the area.  Councillor Jewell moved approval of the application.

Councillor Marshall referred to the insinuation that irregular funding had been provided through the Banks Community Fund and informed the Committee that the Fund was operated by the County Durham Community Fund, not Banks directly.  The Fund was open to all across County Durham to apply to.

The Senior Planning Officer informed the Committee that the consultation carried out by the applicant was over and above what a developer would normally carry out.  The s106 money was necessary to make the development acceptable and applications to draw down this money would be considered by the s106 Working Group.

The applicant confirmed that the Banks Community Fund, which had been in operation for 30 years, had made a donation of £10,000 to Pelton for the purchase of new gym equipment.  However, the Fund was administered by the County Durham Community Foundation.  Three drop in consultation events had been arranged at Pelton Community Centre during November and December 2016 and at the suggestion of Councillor Carr two further consultation events were held in Rosebery Primary school in December 2016 and January 2017.

Councillor Marshall informed the Committee he had a close affinity with the area.  The applicant had carried out consultation over and above that which was expected and had consulted with people affected by the development.  No planning issues had been raised.  The development would be good for the local community and school and would help sustain the community and local businesses.  Councillor Marshall seconded approval of the application.

Councillor Davidson informed the Committee that the Chester le Street local plan had been developed a long time ago, but the Green Belt was still standing.

Councillor Dixon sought clarity on the highways issues raised.  J McGargill, Highways Development Manager replied that there had been two recent junction improvements at Pelton lane roundabout and Ouston Lane which had introduced an elongated roundabout to reduce speed and the severity of accidents.  The majority of vehicles using the A693 would travel towards the A1(M) and there would be an impact on Ouston Lane roundabout which would have capacity issues.  The applicant had agreed to contribute towards a longer-term solution at the junction at Ouston Lane through the future introduction of traffic lights.

Councillor Boyes informed the Committee that the consultation by the applicant was over and beyond what was required.  It was refreshing that community leaders were embracing a housing application.

Upon a vote being taken it was

Resolved:

That the application be approved subject to the completion of a Section 106 Legal Agreement to secure the provision of:-

·                     15% affordable housing units on site including 5 bungalows

·                     £251,940 towards open space and sporting provision within the Electoral Division.

·                     £75,000 towards highway mitigation works.

·                     The formation of a new cycle link between the development site and C2C route

and the conditions contained in the report.