Agenda and minutes

To be informed of the appointment of any substitute members for the meeting.

There were no substitute members appointed.

You are invited to declare any registerable and/or non-registerable interests in matters appearing on the agenda, and the nature of that interest.

You are also requested to complete the Declarations of Interests card available at the meeting and return it to the Democratic Services Officer before leaving the meeting.

You are also invited to disclose any dispensation from the requirement to declare any registerable and/or non-registerable interests that have been granted to you in respect of any matters appearing on the agenda.

There were no declarations of interest or dispensations reported.

To confirm the minutes of the previous meeting held on 10 May 2022.

Resolved that the minutes of the meeting held on 10 May 2022 be confirmed and signed by the Chair.

To receive the attached guidance to members in determining planning applications and to give consideration to the planning applications listed in the following agenda items.

The Committee received guidance in relation to the principles of decision making when determining planning applications and then gave consideration to the planning applications listed in the following minutes.

To determine a full planning application from Mr Stephen Mayne for a new balcony terrace area.

The Committee considered a report from the planning officers, together with an addendum circulated prior to the meeting, in relation to a full planning application from Mr Stephen Mayne for a new balcony terrace area.

A planning officer presented details of the application with the aid of various maps, plans and photographs.

In accordance with the Committee’s Speaking Rights Scheme David Purvis of Percy Gardens, Tynemouth had been granted permission to speak to the Committee. He outlined his objection to the application on the grounds that the proposed balcony would be invasive to his and his wife’s privacy. With the aid of photographs taken from his property he explained that users of the balcony would be able to see into the bedroom and bathroom of his property. This was contrary to policies DM 6.1 and DM 6.2 of the Local Plan in terms of new development demonstrating a positive relationship with neighbouring buildings and its impact on the privacy of adjacent properties. Mr Purvis was also concerned about the potential for noise disturbance from users of the balcony and the impact on his mental health.

The applicant, Stephen Mayne, addressed the Committee to respond to the speakers’ comments. He explained that the design of the proposed balcony had been shortened to minimise its impact on 31 Percy Gardens and aluminium windows were to be installed at the request of the Design Officer. Regardless of the outcome of the application, the roof and cornice of 32 Percy Gardens needed to be replaced but this would only be completed if scaffolding were erected for the construction of the balcony.   

Members of the Committee asked questions of David Purvis, Stephen Mayne and officers and made comments. In doing so the Committee gave particular consideration to:

a)   the exact location of the proposed balcony and its distance from adjacent properties;

b)   the impact of the proposed development on the privacy of residents living in adjacent properties;

c)    the reasons why the planning officers had rejected the option to install 1.8m side screens to the balcony on the grounds of their impact on the character and appearance of the conservation area; and

c)    Paragraph 206 of the National Planning Policy Framework and Policy DM6.2 of the Local Plan and the impact of the development on the character and appearance of the Tynemouth Conservation Area.

Resolved that the application be permitted subject to the conditions set out in the planning officers report.

(Reasons for decision: The Committee concluded that, having regard to the relevant policies contained in the Council’s Local Plan 2017 and National Planning Policy Framework, the proposed development was acceptable in terms of its impact on character and appearance of the Tynemouth Conservation Area and on the amenity and privacy of neighbouring residents.)

To determine a full planning application from Springfield Park Holdings SPV1 Ltd for change of use of a vacant former care home to provide 12 no. residential apartments with associated parking, landscaping and other associated infrastructure (Amended description and amended plans received 09.12.2021)

The Committee considered a report from the planning officers, together with an addendum circulated prior to the meeting, in relation to a full planning application from Springfield Park Holdings SPV1 Ltd for change of use of a vacant former care home to provide 12 no. residential apartments with associated parking, landscaping and other associated infrastructure.

A planning officer presented details of the application with the aid of various maps, plans and photographs.

Members of the Committee asked questions of officers and made comments. In doing so the Committee gave particular consideration to the adequacy of car parking within the development site and surrounding area.

Resolved that (1) the Committee is minded to grant this application subject to an agreement under Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 and the addition, omission or amendment of any other conditions considered necessary; and

(2) the Director of Regeneration and Economic Development be authorised to determine the application following the completion of the Section 106 Legal Agreement to secure a financial contribution of £1,812.00 towards coastal mitigation.

To determine a reserved matters application from Persimmon Homes (NE) Newcastle Ltd for the submission of details of appearance, landscaping, layout and scale in respect of erection of 66 dwellings, garages, car parking together with associated boundary treatment and infrastructure pursuant to hybrid application 16/01885/FUL.

The Committee considered a report from the planning officers, together with an addendum circulated prior to the meeting, in relation to a reserved matters planning application from Persimmon Homes (NE) for the submission of details of appearance, landscaping, layout and scale in respect of erection of 66 dwellings, garages, car parking together with associated boundary treatment and infrastructure pursuant to hybrid application 16/01885/FUL.

A planning officer presented details of the application with the aid of various maps, plans and photographs.

Members of the Committee asked questions of officers and made comments. In doing so the Committee gave particular consideration to the status and currency of the travel plan submitted as part of the original hybrid application approved in 2018.   

Resolved that the application be permitted subject to the conditions set out in the planning officers report and addendum.

(Reasons for decision: The Committee concluded that, having regard to the relevant policies contained in the Council’s Local Plan 2017 and National Planning Policy Framework, the proposed development was acceptable in terms of its layout, scale, appearance and landscaping.)

To determine a full planning application from Geggs PLC for conversion of redundant freezer into additional production space and the erection of extensions to create ancillary space.  Demolition of: Two long-standing temporary buildings, existing goods-in dock area with 2no docks for Balliol 1 building, low-level building on the Southern front of the redundant freezer building and existing plantrooms to the Western side of the redundant freezer building.  Conversion of the redundant finished goods store into a 4th production line and associated stores etc. to create Balliol 3 building.  Erection of: New link bridge, new Western extension, roof level pod for future process equipment, new goods-in dock area with 3no docks at ground level and new canteen space above at first floor level to connect the first floor of Balliol 3 to the existing GTC building, new extension to Balliol 1 on the North-East corner, new external walkway canopy crossing the car park from Balliol 2 to Balliol 1 to allow staff from Balliol 2 to access the new staff facilities, new first floor level car park located on the Gosforth Bakery car park to the North of the proposed works and new Gatehouse at the South-West entrance to the site to control traffic movements onto and off site.

The Committee considered a report from the planning officers in relation to a full planning application from Greggs PLC for conversion of redundant freezer into additional production space and the erection of extensions to create ancillary space.  Demolition of: Two long-standing temporary buildings, existing goods-in dock area with 2no docks for Balliol 1 building, low-level building on the Southern front of the redundant freezer building and existing plantrooms to the Western side of the redundant freezer building.  Conversion of the redundant finished goods store into a 4th production line and associated stores etc. to create Balliol 3 building.  Erection of: New link bridge, new Western extension, roof level pod for future process equipment, new goods-in dock area with 3no docks at ground level and new canteen space above at first floor level to connect the first floor of Balliol 3 to the existing GTC building, new extension to Balliol 1 on the North-East corner, new external walkway canopy crossing the car park from Balliol 2 to Balliol 1 to allow staff from Balliol 2 to access the new staff facilities, new first floor level car park located on the Gosforth Bakery car park to the North of the proposed works and new Gatehouse at the South-West entrance to the site to control traffic movements onto and off site.

A planning officer presented details of the application with the aid of various maps, plans and photographs.

Resolved that the application be permitted subject to the conditions set out in the planning officers report.

(Reasons for decision: The Committee concluded that, having regard to the relevant policies contained in the Council’s Local Plan 2017 and National Planning Policy Framework, the proposed development was acceptable in terms of the principle of the development and its impact on amenity, character and appearance and highway safety.)