Agenda and minutes

No declarations of interest were received.

RESOLVED that the minutes of the meeting held on 7 March 2024 be confirmed and signed by the Chair as a correct record.

RESOLVED that the attendance matrix be noted.

The officer summarised the officer report which had been pre-circulated.

Members sought clarification around the following matters;

·       Was the floor plan of the new building larger than the old building;

·       How were you intending providing cycle facilities as stated in condition 12?

·       How would cycle storage be provided within the leisure facility in accordance with Sustran guidance?

·       Were they looking for carbon neutrality in terms of modifications?;

·       Has cycle parking been removed from the gym side of the leisure centre;

·       Was it intended to make any modifications to the cycle lanes?

·       Can we consider e charging points?

Members questioned the supporter on the following points

·       Could you outline the energy efficiency provisions on the building?

·       How much would insulation and triple glazing reduce the running costs?

·       Can we assume that the development would be net zero if it were not for the limited budget?

·       Climate change was problematic and the Council Policy was to be carbon neutral by 2030. What changes would be required to make the development carbon zero?

The agent was present at the meeting and made the following comments:-

·       Part of the scheme was to provide a facility which had previously been lost at the Leisure Centre;

·       There was some difficulty in getting swimming pools to be net zero but we have got it as low as possible;

·       The thick insulation was better than standard, the micro filtration new system in the pool was much more energy efficient; the use of heat pumps and we are all electric;

·       We have looked at all materials for sustainability;

·       The ventilation requirements were being looked at;

·       We have done everything we can do bearing in mind this was an extension onto an existing Leisure Centre;

Members questioned the agent on the following points:-

·       Have you any experience where the development was not an extension and was carbon zero;

·       Even if the development was approved today I would request the information on what would be required to make the development carbon neutral. It is our duty to encourage the implementation of our 2030 Policy.

Members debated the application and made the following comments:-

·       The residents of TS6 had waited years for this facility and this had incurred parents in extra costs and made other centres busier;

·       The development was not 100% carbon zero but it was as close as possible as it could be;

·       This would give health benefits which were needed;

·       Disappointed that we have not got the full facts;

·       A swimming pool was a huge energy user and not sure it would ever be carbon neutral;

·       The proposal was within development limits and would enhance a sports and community facility;

·       The scale and design was acceptable and would not have an adverse

Impact on the street scene.

RESOLVED that Planning Permission be granted subject to the following conditions:-

1.       The development shall not be begun later than the expiration of THREE YEARS from the date of this permission.

          REASON: Required to be imposed pursuant to Section 91 of the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 116.

The Officer summarised the officer report which had been pre-circulated.

Members sought clarification around the following matters;

·       Why had the National Highways Agency recommended that the application should not be approved until 19 April 2024;

·       Specific reference was made to the holding resolution being removed and conditions to be added;

·       Conditions 14 and 17 required further information so how did that effect our decision today;

·       The conditions in respect of drainage and highways needed to be adhered to;

·       Aware of previous pollution on the land and the Environment Agency had expressed concern with regard to pollution. Was steel slag storage going to be under cover and would this be part of the material or outline permission?

·       Northumbrian Water and the Environment Agency had many concerns regarding the potential for pollution, how would this be mitigated and managed?

·       The drains and sewers on the site were to be transferred to private ownership however no details were given;

·       There were many details to be brought together which was demonstrated by the number of conditions;

·       Given the complexity of all the conditions and requirements and subject matters covered concerned about the ability of the department to cope with the interpretation of the details required before the conditions were fulfilled;

·       Were the timescales contained within some of the conditions relevant since the application had already been delayed before coming before Members;

·       The wording of condition 8 was woolly with no clear objective. Would it be possible to tighten up the wording?

·       The Travel Plan condition was not clear and would like to see it tightened early on so that they were not made up later;

·       Every aspect of the report had conditions attributed to it which demonstrated that we were trying to make the development as safe as it could be for the area;

·       The development would bring jobs to the area;

·       If any of the conditions were broken by the Company would they be brought to account?

A supporter was present at the meeting and made the following comments;

·       The development would generate significant employment to the area and bring back the heart of the industrial heritage;

·       Steel production had made a significant contribution to Teesside and it was important to secure its retention in the area;

·       This development would provide a significant boost to the area and would contribute to the development of cutting edge technologies;

·       The electrification of the process decarbonised the process by 75%;

·       For future decades we would lead with our technologies;

·       We required swift and decisive action;

·       Development would be over many years as all technologies moved on and were radically improved;

·       Could reduce emissions in a short period;

·       There would be construction jobs and ongoing jobs created plus many others in the supply chain;

·       The company were looking to the future.

Members questioned the supporter on the following points;

·       Was steel production currently taking place at Scunthorpe?

·       What environmental issues occurred here which made it better than other areas of the Country considering the potential for new  ...  view the full minutes text for item 117.

At this point Councillor Quartermain left the meeting.

The officer summarised the officer report which had been pre-circulated.

A supporter present made the following comments;

·       The proposal respected the Conservation Area;

·       Careful consideration had been given to the number of trees removed and there would be minimal pruning of the bushes;

·       The proposal would allow for safe manoeuvring;

·       The gravel used would be the same used by the occupants of number 1;

·       There were 5 individual gardens divided by trees and hedging;

·       The wall was currently in a desperate state of repair and a small section had a hole in it;

·       The repair work would be in keeping with the Conservation Area;

·       The recent yellow lining had amplified the problem with parking in the village;

·       Numbers 1-4 had allocated parking at the rear of their properties, however we do not have adequate manoeuvring space at the rear;

·       Number 2 was currently empty but once it was occupied there would be additional residents causing further difficulty with parking;

·       This proposal would improve the existing problem providing extra spaces for visitors by taking cars off the highway;

·       The proposal would not impinge on privacy or safety nor the impact on the village or its residents.

A Member questioned the supporter on the following point;

The Conservation Officer had recommended conditions and had made reference to a gate?

The Ward Member present made the following comments:-

·       In support of the proposal;

·       Concerned over the current state of the wall as it looked as if it was ready to fall over;

·       Safety concerns regarding where residents parked and got out of their cars;

·       The Ward Members had been in favour of the yellow lines which had pushed the issue of on street parking further down to where the cottages were;

·       The proposal gave the resident the opportunity to park safely off the street;

·       If the wall were left in its current state it would not be long before it fell down;

·       The previous objection was around the gate which had been removed from the plans;

·       The applicant had made a number of concessions.

The agent present made the following comments;

·       In order to allow access a small section of the wall had to be removed;

·       The wall had fallen into disrepair;

·       The opening would be between two buttresses;

·       The gate was no longer part of the proposal;

·       Extensive work was required along the whole length of the wall;

·       The land was in the residents ownership and would allow them to park within their own garden;

·       All planting would be retained;

·       Careful consideration had been given to the work to ensure it was fitting for the area;

·       Parking was currently restrained;

·       The only parking space lost was that used by the applicant;

·       The proposal would have minimum effect on the Conservation Area.

RESOLVED that Planning Permission be granted subject to the following conditions:-

1.             The development shall not be begun later than the expiration oTHREE YEARS from the date of this permission.

          REASON: Required to  ...  view the full minutes text for item 118.

The officer summarised the officer report which had been pre-circulated.

The objectors present at the meeting made the following comments;

·       Concerned about extra water entering an already struggling drainage system;

·       The area flooded regularly, the last flood being in 2023 when water came into the properties on Liverton Terrace;

·       The proposal would bring extra vehicle close to our residential homes;

·       Concerned about the extra car emissions and the safety of children and older residents;

·       Concerned about the use of cleaning chemicals close to our homes;

·       There would be an increased fire risk;

·       A lot of food waste and rubbish stored close to properties attracting vermin and bringing odours;

·       Concerned about the safety and security of residents at nighttime;

·       By 1030pm residents had retired for the night;

·       The proposal would attract people from outside the area;

·       The houses backed straight onto the business.

·       Children attended the local youth club and one of the things we try to teach them was healthy eating;

·       The houses were owner occupied or leased by families;

·       The proposed takeaway would open every day;

·       Concerned regarding the impact on the community;

·       People would congregate around the premises after midnight consuming food and talking and it could take an hour after closing to clear the area;

·       A lot of people travel to Easington where there was an existing car wash facility and there were 4 existing established takeaways in Loftus;

·       Food could already be purchased in the village at the fish and chip shop;

·       My interpretation of the current policy was different to that of your officers.

Members questioned the objectors on the following points;

·       What was the opening times of the fish and chip shop in the village?

·       What was the disturbance like now from the current businesses?

·       Was Hollywell Public House still operating?

·       Were there any issues currently with late night revellers?

·       Are you concerned about the takeaway or the hours of operation?

·       Would you object if it were only open during the day?

The agent present at the meeting made the following comments;

·       There were two aspects to the application the continuation of the current car wash facility and the introduction of a hot food takeaway;

·       The current business had been operating for years;

·       The equipment would be silent and the valeting would be on a reduced scale to that which currently existed;

·       The takeaway complied with relevant policy;

·       The premises were a reasonable distance from residential property;

·       The fish and chip shop was some distance away from this proposal;

·       The proposal complied with all regulations relating to odour and noise;

·       The premises had its own parking spaces which could be accessed from both ends of the site;

·       As the premises were currently empty they might attract their own anti-social behaviour;

·       The current use was not viable and therefore the change of use was necessary;

·       There would be job opportunities for 12 people;

·       There were no flooding issues with drainage installed as a precautionary measure. The proposed use would not exacerbate the current situation;

·       Requested  ...  view the full minutes text for item 119.

RESOLVED that consideration of the Delegated Decisions be deferred to the next meeting.

RESOLVED that consideration of the Appeals Information be deferred to the next meeting.

RESOLVED that consideration of the Enforcement Schedule be deferred to the next meeting.

RESOLVED that consideration of the Section 106 Agreement Update be deferred to the next meeting.

R/2023/0818/F3M Extension of existing Leisure Centre for provision of new swimming pool facility (including learner pool) including changing areas; plant and machinery equipment Eston Leisure Centre Normanby Road Normanby Middlesbrough TS6 9AE.

Deemed Consent granted subject to the following conditions:-

1.       The development shall not be begun later than the expiration of THREE YEARS from the date of this permission.

          REASON: Required to be imposed pursuant to Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.

2.       The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans:

          Location Plan (ELC-GT3-Z1-00-DR-A-90100-RevP06) received by the Local Planning Authority on 01/02/2024

          Proposed Site Plan (ELC-GT3-Z1-00-DR-A-90001-RevP08) received by the Local Planning Authority on 01/02/2024

          Ground Floor Plan (ELC-GT3-Z1-00-DR-A-08000-RevP05) received by the Local Planning Authority on 01/02/2024

          Mezzanine Level Plan (ELC-GT3-Z1-01-DR-A-08001-RevP03) received by the Local Planning Authority on 01/02/2024

          Proposed roof plan (ELC-GT3-Z1-RF-DR-A-08002-RevP03) received by the Local Planning Authority on 01/02/2024

          Proposed Elevations (ELC-GT3-Z1-ZZ-DR-A-08201-RevP03) received by the Local Planning Authority on 01/02/2024

          Existing and Proposed Levels (ELC-OOB-Z0-00-DR-L-90010) received by the Local Planning Authority on 01/02/2024

          Cross Section (ELC-GT3-Z1-ZZ-DR-A-08300-RevP03) received by the Local Planning Authority on 01/02/2024

          Proposed Landscaping Plan (ELC-OOB-Z0-00-DR-L-90001) received by the Local Planning Authority on 01/02/2024

          Proposed Planting Strategy (ELC-OOB-Z0-00-DR-L-90040) received by the Local Planning Authority on 01/02/2024

          Typical Landscape Details (ELC-OOB-Z0-00-DR-L-90511) received by the Local Planning Authority on 01/02/2024

          Fencing Details (ELC-OOB-Z0-00-DR-L-90521) received by the Local Planning Authority on 01/02/2024

          Flood Exceedance Plan (ELC-BGP-Z0-SL-DR-C-52-52102) received by the Local Planning Authority on 01/02/2024

          Impermeable Surface Plan (ELC-BGP-Z0-SL-DR-C-52-52101) received by the Local Planning Authority on 01/02/2024

          Drainage Plan (ELC-BGP-Z0-SL-DR-C-52-52130) received by the Local Planning Authority on 01/02/2024

          REASON: To accord with the terms of the planning application.

3.       Development shall be implemented in line with the drainage scheme contained within the submitted document entitled "Drainage Plan" dated "December 2023". The drainage scheme shall ensure that foul flows discharge to the combined sewer at or immediately downstream of manhole 9603 and ensure that surface water also discharges to the combined sewer between manholes 9603 -9602. The surface water discharge rate shall not exceed the available capacity of 5l/sec that has been identified in this sewer. The final surface water discharge rate shall be agreed by the Lead Local Flood Authority.

          REASON: To prevent the increased risk of flooding from any sources in accordance with the NPPF.

4.       The development hereby permitted shall not come into use until the highway works detailed below have been carried out in accordance with the submitted drawing(s) ELC - GT3 - Z1 - 00 - DR - A - 90001 - RevP08 or such plans which are subsequently submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority:

          a)       Provision of a footway at a depth of 5m along the site frontage on Normanby Road;

          b)       Renewal of any damaged kerbs;

          c)       Introduction of tactile paving as required for any crossing facilities; and,

          d)       Radii and resurfacing as required at both access junctions to the north west and south west of the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 124.

RESOLVED that consideration of the Annual Monitoring Report 2022-23 be deferred to the next meeting.