Planning Services

COMMITTEE REPORT

AGENDA ITEM NUMBER:

APPLICATION DETAILS

APPLICATION NO: CMA/1/53

FULL APPLICATION DESCRIPTION: Proposed erection of 6 bedroom house to be used as children's home (use class C2)

NAME OF APPLICANT: Corporate and Legal Services, Durham County Council

ADDRESS: Tanfield Lea Road, Tanfield Lea, Stanley

ELECTORAL DIVISION Tanfield

CASE OFFICER: Grant Folley, Senior Planner, 0191 3834097, grant.folley@durham.gov.uk

DESCRIPTION OF THE SITE AND PROPOSALS

1. The application relates to a Greenfield site situated on the eastern side of Tanfield Lea Road (B6173). The site is situated to the south east of a car repair garage and on the opposite side of the road to the Tanfield Lea Comprehensive School.

2. The site was originally used as a sewerage works and for mining with reservoir tanks

situated underground on the application site. Thereafter the application site was used as a playing field until circa 1994, since when the land has been relatively unkempt in its current state. A mature hedge screens the site from Tanfield Road. Additional planting is also found along the northern boundary of the site adjacent to the car repair garage.

3. The site is situated within a wildlife corridor as designated in the Derwenstide Local

Plan.

4. Planning permission is sought for the erection of a 6 bedroomed dwelling house to be used as a children’s home (use class C2). The new home is required to replace the existing facility in Catchgate. The present children’s home is experiencing significant friction from local Catchgate residents, which in turn is impacting upon Durham County Council staff. As such it is important that this new facility is made available at the earliest opportunity.

5. The proposed building is to be designed to have the appearance of normal two-

storey domestic dwelling. The building will be constructed of brick and block external walls, a tiled roof, UPVC windows, and hardwood doors. The proposal includes an attached garage on the rear elevation.

6. Vehicular access is to be provided to the site via a new access road which will lead

from Tanfield Road. The new access is to be provided approximately half way between the existing garage to the north, and public right of way to the south. The proposed access road is to include a pedestrian footpath. A parking area is to be provided to the south side of the proposed building, and will provide spaces for four cars. Pedestrian access is to also be provided directly from Tanfield Lea Road through a gate, leading to the front door of the property.

7. A private garden is to be provided at the rear of the property which is to be enclosed

by a 1.8m timber fence. Other than to allow for the creation of the new access road and pedestrian access, the existing hedge along the road frontage is to be retained.

8. The new home will be designed for 4 children and 2 staff, each having an en-suite

bedroom facility. One staff en-suite bedroom will be located on the ground floor and will be a DDA accessible room, which could be used by any future child with access issues. The proposed dwelling is to be laid out internally similarly to any residential dwelling, to include a kitchen, dining area and lounge. An office is also to be provided on the ground floor.

9. The planning application is supported by a Design and Access Statement (including

background statement) and Phase 1 Ecological Survey.

10. The application is reported to committee at the request of the Electoral Division member, Councilor Joe Wilson.

PLANNING HISTORY

11. None relevant to the current application.

PLANNING POLICY

NATIONAL POLICY:

12. Planning Policy Statement 1: Delivering Sustainable Development (PPS1)- sets out the Government’s overaching planning policies on the delivery of sustainable development through the planning system.

13. Planning Policy Statement 3: Housing (PPS3) underpins the delivery of the Government's strategic housing policy objectives and our goal to ensure that everyone has the opportunity to live in a decent home, which they can afford in a community where they want to live.

14. The emerging National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF), currently in draft form, is a material consideration in the determination of planning applications, and advances a presumption in favour of sustainable development to encourage economic growth.

REGIONAL PLANNING POLICY:

15. The North East of England Plan - Regional Spatial Strategy to 2021 (RSS) July 2008, sets out the broad spatial development strategy for the North East region for the period of 2004 to 2021. The RSS sets out the region's housing provision and the priorities in economic development, retail growth, transport investment, the environment, minerals and waste treatment and disposal. Some policies have an end date of 2021 but the overall vision, strategy, and general policies will guide development over a longer timescale.

16. In July 2010 the Local Government Secretary signaled his intention to revoke

Regional Spatial Strategies with immediate effect, and that this was to be treated as a material consideration in subsequent planning decisions. This was successfully challenged in the High Court in November 2010, thus for the moment reinstating the RSS. However, it remains the Government’s intention to abolish Regional Spatial Strategies when the forthcoming Local Government Bill becomes law, and weight can now be attached to this intension.

17. Policy 1 – North East Renaissance refers top the central theme running through the

RSS: “the need to achieve and maintain a high quality of life for all, both now and in the future” and identifies a strategy through which delivery of an urban and rural renaissance may be achieved.

18. Policy 2 – Sustainable Development promotes sustainable development and

construction through the delivery of identified environmental, social and economic objectives.

19. Policy 3 – Climate Change requires new development to contribute towards the

mitigation of climate change and assist adaption to the impacts of climate change.

20. Policy 7 – Connectivity and Accessibility identifies the improvement and enhancement of sustainable internal and external connectivity and accessibility of the North East by, inter alia, reducing the need to travel unnecessarily.

21. Policy 8 – Protecting and Enhancing the Environment seeks to maintain and enhance

the quality, diversity and local distinctiveness of the North East environment.

22. Policy 24 – Delivering Sustainable Communities requires the assessment of land for development, and consideration of the contribution design can bring.

23. Policy 33 - Biodiversity and Geodiveristy advises that planning proposals should

ensure that the Regions ecological and geological resources are protected and enhanced to return key biodiversity resources to a viable level.

24. Policy 35 - Flood Risk requires consideration to be given to the flood risk implications

of development proposals adopting the sequential risk based approach set out in PPS25.

LOCAL PLAN POLICY: (Derwentside District Local Plan)

25. Policy GDP1 – General Development Principles – outlines the requirements that new development proposals should meet.

26. Policy TR2 – Development and Highway Safety – relates to the provision of safe vehicular access, adequate provision for service vehicle maneuvering, etc.

27. Policy EN2 – Preventing Urban Sprawl – except where specifically allowed for by other policies, development outside existing built up areas will not be permitted.

28. Policy H05 – Housing Development on Small Sites – development will not be approved if it extends beyond the built up area of a settlement.

29. Policy EN23 - Requires regard to be had to the integrity and conservation value of the wildlife corridor.

The above represents a summary of those policies considered most relevant in the Development Plan the full

text, criteria, and justifications of each may be accessed at http://www.durham.gov.uk/Pages/Service.aspx?ServiceId=6617

CONSULTATION AND PUBLICITY RESPONSES

STATUTORY RESPONSES:

30. Environment Agency – No comment.

31. Coal Authority – No objections, standard advice to be included with any planning permission.

INTERNAL CONSULTEE RESPONSES

32. Planning Policy – No objection to the scheme.

33. Highways Authority – The proposed access arrangements are considered to be acceptable. No objections to the proposed development.

34. Low Carbon Officer – Standard advice provided regarding eh Council’s policy on sustainable buildings provided to the applicant.

PUBLIC RESPONSES:

35. The application has been advertised by site notices which have been erected in the vicinity of the application site. Neighbour consultation letters have been sent to 7. no properties.

36. A total of 5 no. letters of representation has been received in relation to this application. Objections have been raised on the following grounds:

• The site is unsuitable for the proposed use. More appropriate sites must be available.

• There is nothing in the surrounding area for children to do. The lack of activities available could lead to boredom and increase the risk of vandalism.

• Adjacent residents and occupants will be disturbed by coming and goings at all hours of the day and night.

• Concerns regarding the impact on local bushiness though arson and vandalism. Concerns regarding the security of premises.

• Decrease in value of nearby properties.

• Concerns have been raised regarding the publicity and public consultation process followed by the Council. The description of the development is considered to be vague, and has caused rumor to proliferate.

37. The Electoral Division Member for Tanfield, Councillor Joe Wilson has also objected to the application. The Councillor is concerned that a unit of this type should not be positioned opposite a school of excellence and side by side to their sports fields.

APPLICANTS STATEMENT:

The Background

38. Durham County Council Children and Young Peoples Services’ operate a Children’s Home at Catchgate which currently accommodates 3 young people on a residential basis.

The Existing Facility

39. 9 Rogerley Terrace, Catchgate, has been a Children’s Home for approximately 30 years. In 2003 the Statement of Purpose of the Home was changed from the provision of long term residential care to emergency short-term placements, with the focus on working with families to improve relationships and [where possible] to return children to their original home.

The challenges faced at this address.

40. There have been long standing issues relating to the safety of young people and staff within the Catchgate neighbourhood, that interfere with delivering the objectives of the Home. The home has frequently been the focus of anti-social behaviour. There have been threats to staff, illegal entry into the Home, and unacceptable levels of intimidation of both staff and teenagers alike. Added to this, we have anecdotal evidence of regular deliveries of drugs in the vicinity, which appears to fuel this anti-social behaviour.

41. Since 2006 the operation of the Home has been severely limited by its location, as the

decision had to be made to restrict occupancy to 3 rather than 5 young people, in order to allow the home to continue to function in its current, difficult, environment.

42. Ofsted Inspectors have frequently commented upon the unsuitability of the location. In

2008 Catchgate would have been judged “outstanding” if it had been in a different neighbourhood. If Catchgate receives a judgement of “inadequate” in relation to safeguarding because of its location that would mean an overall judgement of “inadequate” for the Home, which would negatively affect the County Council’s overall performance rating.

43. The present location and the high level of anti social behavior in the community

places this Children’s home at considerable risk. The Local Authority’s ability to promote and secure the safety and welfare of children placed in Catchgate is severely compromised by its location.

Earlier attempts to secure a new facility.

44. Searches of Estate Agents registers by DCC found in excess of 30 potential properties, of which one in Sunderland Bridge Village was rated the optimal solution.

45. Intentions were ‘declared’ on this property, which gave rise to significant local

opposition, plus resistance from an adjacent landowner who refused to consider allowing Right of Access across his property.

46. Then an existing dwelling was identified at Mainsforth Village, however local

opposition was again so strong, that residents jointly purchased the house themselves in order to thwart DCC’s intentions.

47. Contact was established with Bellway with regard to a potential new build on the

former Direct Services site at Framwellgate Moor, and on another site at Chester le Street. The house builder was reluctant to commit on dates for suitable plots, and came across as inflexible when DCC sought non-standard internal layouts.

48. More recently, a site for a new Home was considered at Haswell Village, which did

have some merit, however a violent incident at a nearby public house involving firearms caused us to turn-our-backs on this locality, for obvious reasons.

49. Before the advent of Asset Management’s new “search facility” in late 2010, several

potential parcels of land were manually identified, but were rejected due to [a] too remote from established communities [b] too close to existing dwellings , or [c] would leave a residual acreage too small to be marketable in that location.

50. Furthermore, an existing DCC owned building called Steelhaven, positioned on the

western fringe of Consett Town Centre was considered, but a degree of animosity had already built up with recent occupiers of the building (a charity for the homeless) and the geometry of the building did not lend itself to a successful conversion and refurbishment.

The site selection process, that identified the Tanfield address.

51. Too often, we found that existing detached residential properties were either [a] very

remote from existing settlements , offering solitude at a level that could prove negative to young peoples psychological improvement, or [b] were too close to existing dwellings, such that we were in danger of repeating the above Catchgate situation. Timely provision of a replacement Home, in the right locality and environment, was best achieved through prudent site selection, and a newly built facility. Only the above approach could allow DCC the degree of ‘control’ required to ensure a greater likelihood of success.

52. By undertaking an automated search of over 400 parcels of land owned by DCC,

Asset Management (AM) identified 6 suitably sized plots of land already earmarked for disposal. A team from AM, CYPS and the existing Catchgate Home evaluated the 6 sites as follows;

Blackhall Rocks – little social activity in the vicinity, directly adjacent mobile phone mast, potential for rebel elements in the neighbouring housing estate. Wheatley Hill – land approached by unsurfaced track, entry position could be barricaded by anti-social elements, some adjacent housing boarded up. Sherburn Hill – somewhat depressed area, two or three businesses closed down, restricted road access to plot [one unsurfaced], too close to existing dwellings. Langley Moor – good location for City and amenities, football pitch adjacent, pleasant farmland at rear, sufficiently away from housing, but high speed rail line & viaduct presents a suicide risk. Oxhill, Stanley – adjacent busy main road, land historically used by Travellers for grazing, poor panorama across the allotment sheds, near to amenities, but so close to Catchgate [approx 1 mile] that residents there could realistically ignite anti-social behavior at the Oxhill address, ready for the ‘new arrivals’. Tanfield – again a fairly busy road, but detached from nearby residential areas, whilst remaining on a bus route, and within walking distance of facilities in the Town Centre. Staff could easily relocate from the existing Catchgate facility, but sufficiently detached from the latter to deter Catchgate residents from igniting anti-social behavior at Tanfield. Why ‘Tanfield’ suits the proposed facility.

53. Aside of the above, Tanfield answers the required criteria in so many respects. We spoke above of the therapeutic need to immerse these teenagers in a range of conventional daily activities, and to avoid segregation from society. This location would allow pedestrian access to Stanley town centre, to the south, and bus access to the Metrocentre and further afield, to the north, from the doorstep. It lies adjacent to formal sports fields which could be utilised to great benefit with the co-operation of the neighbouring school [to which the fields belong] and – subject to the watchful eye of their Carers – would permit social integration with the young people of the neighbourhood.

54. Furthermore, sufficient land is available [subject to affordability] to allow the

youngsters to experience gardening , horticulture and potentially sustainable techniques often found lacking in their own domestic circumstances, something which can only serve to improve the ‘whole person’ through better emotional wellbeing.

55. Investing in a new property not only gives DCC better control of its ‘destiny’ (in being

able to shape, form and correctly position the new facility) it also demonstrates to the teenagers that their future is important to us, whereas the adaptation or recycling of an existing imperfect building would undoubtedly trigger the very problems being faced at Catchgate, and could produce [in the teenagers] the very opposite effect.

How the Project Team would address other concerns raised.

56. Whilst we understand that this land is now classified as greenfield, historic records confirm that this was the site of a former colliery. Indeed checks with DCC Reclamation have cautioned us with regard to the likelihood of encountering buried structures and contaminated fill beneath the capping layer.

57. With regard to Policy EN23 and the wildlife corridor, we would propose to position the

new residential facility to the western end of the site, near to the highway, thus aligning the property with the Garage business immediately to the north west, and reinforcing the linear pattern of development. This would base the garden area towards the Nature Reserve to the north east, and maintain the opportunity for enhancement of biodiversity as explained below.

The above represents a summary of the comments received on this application. The full written text is available for inspection on the application file which can be viewed at the office of the Strategic Team Development Management, County Hall, Durham

PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS AND ASSESSMENT

58. In accordance with government legislation, the decision on this application should be taken in accordance with development plan policies unless material considerations indicate otherwise.

59. The key issues from to be considered in determining this planning application relate to the objectives of the saved policies in the Local Plan, the general aims of national planning policy and evidence contained in the Strategic Flood Risk Assessment (SFRA), and the concerns raised by local residents.

Planning Policy

60. The site is located outside of the nearest built up settlement, on a site that is regarded as greenfield land. Policies EN2 and HO5 of the Local Plan seek to direct development to existing settlements and to prevent encroachment and sprawl of existing built up areas into the surrounding countryside.

61. Policies and guidance at the regional and national level seek to direct new

development to brownfield land where possible, to ensure development is located close to facilities and amenities. It is noted, however, that the latest iteration of PPS3 has a lighter touch with regard to the re-development of brownfield land, and the presumption for brownfield first is less emphatic in the new version of the statement.

62. The application site is located within a recognised wildlife corridor. Policy EN23

applies in such instances, and requires regard to be had to the integrity and conservation value of the corridor. Wherever possible, development proposals that impinge upon a wildlife corridor should include compensatory measures to enhance or restore the nature conservation interest of the area. It is noted that the submitted Ecological Survey features recommendations to reduce the impact of the scheme upon biodiversity within the development site. The recommendations included in this report would be made a condition of any planning permission.

63. The site is shown to be partially affected by surface water flooding in the SFRA. The

report recommends that the Council and developers reference this information when considering a site for future development. Careful consideration should be taken of overland flow routes and/or localised depressions within, or in close proximity to a site. As a minimum, the design of the site drainage system should ensure that surface water is managed effectively and safely, in accordance with the design criteria set out in the SFRA. As such a planning conditon requiring the agreement of a suitable sustainable urban drainage system would need to be attached to any grant of planning permission.

64. Given the above policy considerations it would normally be considered that the

proposed scheme represents unacceptable development of the site - encroachment into the countryside and development of similar greenfield sites has generally been resisted in the former Derwentside district area. As such the proposals could be considered to be contrary to the relevant Local Plan policies.

65. In this instance however, given the linear pattern and form of adjacent development it

is considered that the visual impact of the scheme would be marginal and likely to appear mostly as an unobtrusive extension of the existing building line.

66. In terms of wider sustainability concerns, the thrust of PPS1 is to create ‘inclusive’

and ‘sustainable’ places, which encourage mixed communities and more sociable neighbourhoods. The draft National Planning Policy Framework echoes the need to create strong, vibrant and healthy communities with accessible local services that reflect community needs. To this end it is considered that the proposed scheme would not entirely satisfy these aims given the rather peripheral location of the site.

67. The application includes a ‘sequential search’ within the submitted Design and

Access Statement which considers five other sites that are of appropriate scale and in Council ownership. While it is considered that two of these sites are located in more central locations than the application site, it is argued in the statement that there are additional mitigating factors (e.g. proximity to high speed rail network and related suicide risks) that preclude the use of these sites for this development. In considering the information relating to the search for a site, it is accepted that while the site is on the edge of the existing settlement it is also the case that Stanley town centre and the lesser facilities at Tanfield Lea village centre are both within reasonable walking distance (approx 1km and 600m respectively); there is also a small convenience store within approximately 400m of the site. Similarly, the site is served by a bus route off Tanfield Road which links to Stanley town centre where access to a range of main centres is possible. There are good sports facilities and a newly refurbished park (Oakey Park) within close proximity to the site and excellent facilities at the Louisa Leisure Centre in Stanley town centre.

The site is also adjacent to Kyo Burn and Harperley Wood which contains ancient woodland and is a site of nature conservation importance.

68. As stated previously the proposed development is considered to be contrary to the relevant Local Plan policies, as such the acceptability of the scheme hinges upon the materiality and weight that should be afforded to the social concerns and the need to provide residence in a short timescale. The crucial question is therefore whether these factors outweigh any harm which can be considered to arise from the conflict with the above mentioned planning policies.

69. In this regard, whilst a more centrally-located and integrated scheme would be

preferred, it is accepted that a search to find such a site has proved unfruitful. Consequently, in this instance it is considered that the need to ensure a safe residence for vulnerable individuals would be in keeping with the need to support the well-being of communities as set down in national planning policy. As such, although the proposed scheme could be considered to be contrary to the relevant Local Plan policies, with regard to the factors above it is considered that the benefits of the proposal are sufficient to outweigh any harm arising by reason of conflict with the relevant saved local plan policies .

Representations

70. The Electoral Division Member has raised concerns regarding appropriateness of this location for the erection of a Children’s Home. This issue has been discussed previously in this report.

71. Local residents have raised concerns relating to loss of amenity including potential

anti-social behavior, noise and crime. It is not known what sorts of disabilities/illnesses/behavioral problems etc. that the children of the proposed care home may have, however, this is, in itself, not a material planning consideration.

72. It is known that the children would be cared for by two staff, 24 hours a day. Given these circumstances, the risk of any potential antisocial behavior, noise or crime against the local community would be small in scale such that the risk would be within normal acceptable limits.

73. It is not considered that the proposal would cause any privacy or visual intrusion

issues as the proposed building is sited a significant distance from residential properties.

74. Residents also raised concerns relating to a reduction in house prices, this is not a material planning consideration.

75. Concerns have also been raised regarding the publicity and public consultation

process carried out by the Council in relation to this planning application. It has been suggested that the description of the works is too vague, and does not provide information as to the type of children to be homed in the proposed building. However, as stated previously this is not a material planning consideration. As such it is considered that sufficient information has been provided to allow residents to comment on the proposed development.

Other matters

76. The planning application falls within Use Class C2. This use class includes a variety of different uses, including residential hospitals, colleges, and training centres. The proposed building would be considered suitable for any of the allowed uses, as such it is not considered necessary to restrict the use of the building to only a children’s home.

77. The application includes a number of trees along the northern boundary, and extensive hedging along the site frontage. Sections of the hedge are to be removed to allow for the accesses to the site, however it is considered necessary to ensure the remaining planting is protected and retained. It is considered that these trees and hedging make a positive contribution to the street scene and could be potentially damaged or removed due to the proposed works. Therefore a condition should be attached to any planning approval requiring the retention of these trees. A landscaping condition should also be attached to ensure further landscaping works are provided adjacent to the proposed access road and within the garden area.

78. Traffic, parking and access issues have also been raised.The Highways Authority have investigated these issues and have no objections to the proposal.

CONCLUSION

79. The proposed development is considered to represent a departure from the local plan because it represents the development of a Greenfield site and encroaches into the countryside. The development of similar Greenfield site has previously been resisted in the former Derwentside Area. However, the Law requires that development proposals should be considered in accordance with the aims of the development plan in force for the area, unless it is considered that material planning considerations raised by a particular proposal indicate otherwise.

80. The acceptability or otherwise of the scheme hinges upon the materiality and weight

that should be afforded to the social factors arising from the proposed use and the need to provide residence in a short timescale, and whether these factors are sufficient to outweigh any planning harm arising by reason of conflict with the saved local plan policies. In this instance it is considered that there is a clear justification to depart from the aims of the development plan as it is considered that the need to ensure a safe residence for vulnerable individuals would be in keeping with the need to support the well-being of communities as set down in national planning policy and would outweigh any planning harm identified by reason of conflict with saved local plan policy . As such, although the proposed scheme could be considered to be contrary to the relevant Local Plan policies it is considered the proposal represents an acceptable departure from the Local Plan.

81. The design of the proposed building is considered to be acceptable; due to its linear form the proposals will be in keeping with the existing street scene.

82. The concerns raised by local residents have been considered, but are not deemed sufficient to warrant refusal of planning permission.

83. Accordingly, and accepting the that the need to ensure a safe residence for vulnerable individuals would be in keeping with the need to support the well-being of communities in accordance with national planning policy advice, it is considered that a clear justification exists in this case to recommend approval of the development as a justified departure to the aims of the development plan. Members are therefore recommended to approve the application subject to the suggested conditions.

RECOMMENDATION

That the application be APPROVED subject to the following conditions:

REVIE

1. The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of three years from the date of this permission.

2. The development hereby approved shall be carried out in strict accordance with the

following approved plans. Plan References: Site Location (1145888-01 A), Proposed Plans (1145888-03 A), Proposed Elevations (1145888-04 A), Proposed Plan, Elevations and Site Plan (1145888-05 A), Existing Utilities Plan (1145888-06), Catchgate Replacment Childrens Home Tanfield Lea - Ecological Assessment Phase 1, Design and Access Statement (July 2011).

3. Notwithstanding the information shown on the submitted application details of all

materials to be used externally and the standard of their finish shall be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority in writing before the development is commenced, and thereafter implemented in accordance with the approved scheme

4. Notwithstanding the information shown on the submitted drawings details of any

fences, walls or other means of enclosure to be erected on any of the site boundaries or within the site shall be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority in writing before development commences. Development shall thereafter be completed in accordance with the approved details.

5. The Childrens home hereby approved shall not be brought into use until a detailed

landscaping scheme has been submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Local Planning Authority. No tree shall be felled or hedge removed until the landscape scheme, including any replacement tree and hedge planting, is approved as above.Any submitted scheme must be shown to comply with legislation protecting nesting birds and roosting bats. The landscape scheme shall include accurate plan based details of the following:Trees, hedges and shrubs scheduled for retention. Details of hard and soft landscaping including planting species, sizes, layout, densities, numbers. Details of planting procedures or specification. Finished topsoil levels and depths. Details of temporary topsoil and subsoil storage provision.Seeded or turf areas, habitat creation areas and details etc. Details of land and surface drainage. The establishment maintenance regime, including watering, rabbit protection, tree stakes, guards etc. The local planning authority shall be notified in advance of the start on site date and the completion date of all external works.Trees, hedges and shrubs shall not be removed without agreement within five years.

6. All planting, seeding or turfing and habitat creation in the approved details of the

landscaping scheme shall be carried out in the first available planting season following the warehouse extension hereby approved being brought into use. No tree shall be felled or hedge removed until the removal/felling is shown to comply with legislation protecting nesting birds and roosting bats.Any approved replacement tree or hedge planting shall be carried out within 12 months of felling and removals of existing trees and hedges.Any trees or plants which die, fail to flourish or are removed within a period of 5 years from the substantial completion of the development shall be replaced in the next planting season with others of similar size and species. Replacements will be subject to the same conditions.

7. No construction work shall take place, nor any site cabins, materials or machinery be brought on site until a scheme for the protection of the trees to be retained on site has been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority. Thereafter, all trees and hedges, indicated on the approved tree protection plan as to be retained, are to be protected by the erection of fencing, placed as indicated on the plan and comprising a vertical and horizontal framework of scaffolding, well braced to resist impacts, and supporting temporary welded mesh fencing panels or similar approved in accordance with BS.5837:2005.

No operations whatsoever, no alterations of ground levels, and no storage of any materials are to take place inside the fences, and no work is to be done such as to affect any tree. No removal of limbs of trees or other tree work shall be carried out. No underground services trenches or service runs shall be laid out in root protection areas, as defined on the Tree Constraints Plan.

NDATI

8. The tree works hereby approved shall be carried out in accordance with BS 3998 : Recommendations for Tree Work and the European Tree Pruning Guide (European Arboricultural Council).

9. Recommendations contained within the submitted Phase 1 Ecological Survey and Bat Report shall be implemented in full.

10. Development shall not begin until details of a surface water drainage scheme for the

site has been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The scheme shall subsequently be implemented in accordance with the approved details before the development is completed. The scheme shall also include details of how it will be managed and maintained for the design life of the site.

REASONS FOR THE RECOMMENDATION

I. The proposed development is considered to be contrary to Local Plan policies EN2 and H05 of the Derwentside Local Plan, however, in this instance it is considered that the need to ensure a safe residence for vulnerable individuals would be in keeping with the need to support the well-being of communities as set down in national planning policy.

II. The identified social factors and the need to provide residence in a short timescale are considered to outweigh any harm which can be considered to arise by reason of conflict with saved local plan policy such that a departure from the Local Plan is justified.

III. In particular the development was considered acceptable having regard to

consideration of issues of the location of the development, its visual impact, and effects on highways and the environment, and amenity of adjacent occupants and uses.

IV. The stated grounds of objection concerning the impacts on resdiential amenity and

the character of the area are not considered suffcient to justify refusl of the apllication.

BACKGROUND PAPERS

Submitted Application Forms, Plans and supporting documents. Planning Policy Statements PPS1, PPS3 and PPG13

North East of England Plan Regional Spatial Strategy to 2021 (RSS) July 2008 − Derwentside District Local Plan

− Response from County Highway Authority

− Response from Environmental Health - Response from Environment Agency

− Response from Coal Authority

Planning Services

CMA/1/53

Proposed erection of 6 bedroom house to be used as children's home (use class C2) at Tanfield Lea Road,

Tanfield Lea, Stanley

This map is based upon Ordnance Survey material with the permission o Ordnance Survey on behalf of Her majesty’s Stationary Office © Crown copyright. Unauthorised reproduction infringes Crown copyright and may lead to prosecution or civil proceeding. Durham County Council Licence No. 100022202 2005

Comments

Date August 2011 1:1250

SITE BOUNDARY