Agenda item

DM/16/03450/OUT - Land to the West of Blackhall Colliery and South of Hesleden Road, Blackhall Colliery

Outline application for erection of up to 97 dwellings.

Minutes:

The Senior Planning Officer, Chris Baxter, gave a detailed presentation on the report relating to the abovementioned planning application, a copy of which had been circulated (for copy see file of minutes).  Members noted that the written report was supplemented by a visual presentation which included photographs of the site.  The application was for and outline application for the erection of up to 97 dwellings, construction of new vehicular access, open space (including dog walking area) and associated infrastructure and was recommended for approval subject to conditions.

 

The Senior Planning Officer noted the reduction in dwellings, now for up to 96 dwellings, the report having stated up to 97, and that the access would also be considered as part of the application.  Members noted plan showing a roundabout that was proposed for the B1281 and that access for the site would be gained from this roundabout.  It was explained that there were no objections from statutory consultees and that there had been letters of objection and support received from members of the public, with their main points set out within the report.

 

In terms of the principle of the development, the Senior Planning Officer noted that the site had good pedestrian links to Blackhall and the associated existing infrastructure and therefore the site was considered sustainable.  It was added that the Authority was not able to demonstrate a 5 year supply of deliverable housing land and therefore paragraph 14 of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) was engaged, such that planning permission should be granted unless any adverse impacts of doing so would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits or if any specific policies within the NPPF indicate development should be restricted.

 

Members were informed that the Highways Section had initially raised concerns in terms of vehicle speed along the B1281 and inadequate pedestrian crossing points, however, through negotiation with the applicant and Officers, an amended scheme to include a roundabout to allow access to the site and pedestrian crossing points was found to be acceptable.  The Senior Planning Officer added that a Section 106 Legal Agreement would secure 10% affordable housing and a contribution towards play and recreational facilities, and it did not relate to protected species or the heritage coast.  The Senior Planning Officer concluded by noting that the application was considered acceptable and was therefore recommended for approval, subject to the conditions and Section 106 Legal Agreement as set out within the report.

 

The Chairman thanked the Senior Planning Officer and noted there were several speakers registered.  He asked Mr N Barton whether he was speaking in support or objection to the application, Mr N Barton noted on balance he would be speaking in objection. 

 

 

The Chairman asked Councillor R Crute, a Local Councillor for the Blackhalls Division, to speak in relation to the application.

 

Councillor R Crute thanked the Chairman for the opportunity to speak and noted the application was for up to 96 homes.  He added that in speaking the purpose was to note the support of Local Members for the application, himself and Councillor L Pounder, believing it would benefit the village both socially and economical and also to help address any concerns residents may have as regards the application.

 

Councillor R Crute noted that the application was considered to be sustainable in respect of the NPPF and that all statutory and internal consultees were in favour of the application.  He added that main issues raised by residents had been adequately addressed and the public were generally positive about the scheme.  He noted people understood the social and economic benefits and that speaking to many residents individually, they were keen for development to take place.  Councillor R Crute added that the Committee could read the support of Local Members to be the support of local people.

 

Councillor R Crute noted issues raised in terms of flooding, rights of way, and bungalows were set out and addressed within the report, and that 2 letters of objection in terms of access, the pedestrian access and footpath and capacity of local schools had been received.  He added that these issues too were addressed within the Officer’s report either explained or via condition and therefore Local Members were in support of the application.

 

Councillor R Crute explained that there were clear economic and social benefits with the investment in the area was welcomed, and the development was sustainable in terms of the local businesses and schools.  He added there was considerable local support as this development would enable a greater choice of housing within the village, meeting a need for family homes and rebalancing housing in Blackhall.

 

Councillor R Crute noted the objections in terms of highways, however, these had been addressed in terms of the proposed roundabout, Condition 4 and pedestrian crossings over the B1281 road.  Councillor R Crute concluded by noting he suggested looking at the speed limit on this road may also be beneficial.

 

The Chairman thanked Councillor R Crute and asked Mr N Barton to speak in objection to the application.

 

Mr N Barton noted he had several points to make, firstly in connection to the roads in the area, namely the B1281 and the Coast Road.  He explained that the junction between these two roads, could often have tailbacks and that there had been fatalities on these roads in the past.  He added he would support derestriction up to the new roundabout, but not beyond it.  Mr N Barton added that the access was fine in principle, however, further east of the development there was not access from the development to the coast road. 

 

Mr N Barton noted that the B1281 was already a busy road and that he suggested that additional screening via more planting could help shield the site. 

In terms of drainage, Mr N Barton noted the drainage and flood assessments and the inclusion of a Sustainable Drainage System (SuDS) pond on the site.  He added that given that the development would mean an increase in surface water that could not drain away naturally, there should be care to ensure that the capacity of the SuDS was sufficient.

 

Mr N Barton noted that the proposed density of housing was far greater than that of the development opposite and while parking was not a problem, there would be issues in terms of access for deliveries, utilities and emergency vehicles.

 

Mr N Barton concluded by noting the pedestrian right of way at the site was a rough road, and that it should perhaps be adopted and suitably topped.

 

The Chairman thanked Mr N Barton and asked the Agent for the application, Mr S Hesmondhalgh to speak in relation to the application.

 

Mr S Hesmondhalgh explained that he was a Planning Consultant and had undertaken many public consultations in relation to planning applications and noted there was local support for the development.  He added that as stated by the Officer, the Council could not demonstrate a 5 year supply of housing and the development would help meet this need, building where people needed and wanted housing.

 

Mr S Hesmondhalgh noted that it was felt that the development was positive and would help improve the quality of life for those in the village and evidence from the Local County Councillors and Parish Councillors showed good community spirit and positive support for the scheme.

 

Mr S Hesmondhalgh noted that issues had been raised in terms of drainage, highways and housing mix.  In terms of drainage, Mr S Hesmondhalgh noted that the SuDS was set aside and would store and drain water away.  In terms of access, he noted that he was happy in respect of any changes to speed limits as appropriate, and the roundabout dealt with the issues that had been raised.  Mr S Hesmondhalgh noted that the housing mix was based upon a clear lack of housing for families with children and there were semi-detached, detached, bungalows and terraced properties within the scheme.

 

In respect of footpaths, Mr S Hesmondhalgh explained that the formal links alongside would be retained and the informal link would be replaced connecting the site. 

 

Mr S Hesmondhalgh concluded by noting: there was a housing need; the development was sustainable; it gave jobs and investment; gave a broader choice for local people; and was a good scheme on the right site and asked that Members approve the application.  

 

The Chairman thanked Mr S Hesmondhalgh and asked the Senior Planning Officer to respond to the points raised.

 

The Senior Planning Officer noted that in respect of the points raised in terms of highways, the report set out the views of the Highways Section, though the Highways Development Manager was in attendance and may wish to speak on this.

 

In respect of further landscaping and screening, the Senior Planning Officer noted application was an outline application and the details would come through at the Reserved Matters stage, a landscaping plan to be included.  It was added that in terms of drainage, the SuDS area proposed had no objections from the Council’s Drainage Team, Northumbrian Water Limited or the Environment Agency.

 

The Senior Planning Officer explained that in terms of density, working from the original 97 properties this gave a density of approximately 24 properties per hectare which was reasonably low, with planners usually looking for around 30 properties per hectare and with many new developments being greater than 30 properties per hectare.  Members noted that the informal footpath was not a right of way, however it was intended that this would be upgraded in terms of its surface and Condition 13 set out the need for an agreed detailed scheme of improvements to footways, links and rights of way to be in place prior to development taking place.

 

The Highways Development Manager, John McGargill noted that originally the scheme had included a priority T-Junction and following concerns raised by Highways it was agreed that a roundabout was a better solution.  It was added that the roundabout would slow traffic speeds and that any other changes in terms of speed limits would be consulted upon, including with Durham Constabulary.

 

The Chairman thanked the Planning Officer and asked Members of the Committee for their questions and comments on the application.

 

Councillor M Davinson noted he “liked the look” of the proposed roundabout, and he felt the development would be of benefit to the local community with the report setting out that the site was sustainable and with enough school places to accommodate the development.  Accordingly, he proposed that the application be approved.

 

Councillor J Clark noted she was very familiar with the area and added she was sure that Highways Officers will be looking at the impact on the coast road over time and agreed that the works to footpaths would help to encourage people to walk rather than drive.  She added that improved crossings would be also of benefit as vehicle speeds along this road were often excessive and a reduction in the speed limit would also be welcomed.  Councillor J Clark understood the need for housing in the area and seconded that the application be approved.

 

Councillor A Bell noted it appeared to be a brilliant scheme, with the support of the Local Members.  He added that at the full application stage, he felt that a formal play area within the development would be beneficial as it appeared quite a large area without such facility, engaging with the Local Members at that stage.

 

Councillor M Davinson moved that the application be approved; he was seconded by Councillor J Clark.

 

RESOLVED

 

That the application be APPROVED subject to the conditions detailed in the Officer’s report to the Committee.

 

Supporting documents: