PLANNING COMMITTEE AGENDA - Hartlepool Borough Council
PLANNING COMMITTEE AGENDA - Hartlepool Borough Council PLANNING COMMITTEE AGENDA - Hartlepool Borough Council
Planning Committee – 25 th February 2009 4.1 4. size of development brings the building past the building line and is not in keeping with the character of the area 5. affect the value of property 6. unsympathetic 7. the size of the proposed building is outrageously large for a residential area 8. would appear oppressive as it looks like a factory or prison 9. it will be intrusive and give rise to unacceptable degree of overshadowing and overlooking which will have an adverse effect on the living conditions of neighbouring properties 10. would contravene the local plan which is to protect the effect on the amenities of the occupiers of adjoining properties i.e. general disturbance, loss of privacy, visual intrusion, dust, smell and vibration 11. it would have a devastating effect on the traffic flow in Stockton Road 12. the proposal would increase the number of residents but reduce the number of parking spaces 13. significant increase in noise level from staff, vehicles, visitors and the general working environment of a busy large care home given the close proximity of the design to neighbouring private homes 14. trees are to be removed yet the applicant states all existing mature trees would be retained 15. not in keeping with the character and style of the existing buildings in the area, it will be too large 16. the development will increase the traffic activity in the area which will have a detrimental effect both environmentally and noise wise 17. the rear of this large building will only be some 10 metres from the side of my house. It will affect our privacy 18. will adversely affect the amount of daylight and sunlight in the rooms on the adjoining side of our house 19. problems with blocked drains, increased demands will lead to more frequent blockages 20. too big 21. unnecessary 22. parking proposed inadequate 23. construction dirt and noise 24. obstruction of view/light into objectors home 25. invasion of privacy 26. noise, traffic and pollution during building 27. does not feel that proprietors maintain grounds to high enough standards at present and this problem will be escalated 28. overpowering 29. changing the use from a small residential home to a very large commercial business 30. overbearing and threatening to adjacent properties 31. what do we need another care home 32. what happens if the business fails, like Tanfield Nursing home will this development be converted into flats? 33. blot on the landscape 34. block out light Copy Letters F 4.1 Planning 25.02.09 Pl anning apps 92
Planning Committee – 25 th February 2009 4.1 The period for publicity has expired. Consultations 16.7 The following consultation replies have been received: Traffic and Transportation – no objection Public Protection – no objection Adult and Community Services - awaiting comments Engineering Consultancy – awaiting comments Northumbrian Water – no objection subject to condition. Police – comments regarding secured by design Planning Policy 16.8 The following policies in the adopted Hartlepool Local Plan 2006 are relevant to the determination of this application: GEP1: States that in determining planning applications the Borough Council will have due regard to the provisions of the Development Plan. Development should be located on previously developed land within the limits to development and outside the green wedges. The policy also highlights the wide range of matters which will be taken into account including appearance and relationship with surroundings, effects on amenity, highway safety, car parking, infrastructure, flood risk, trees, landscape features, wildlife and habitats, the historic environment, and the need for high standards of design and landscaping and native species. GEP12: States that the Borough Council will seek within development sites, the retention of existing and the planting of additional, trees and hedgerows. Development may be refused if the loss of, or damage to, trees or hedgerows on or adjoining the site will significantly impact on the local environment and its enjoyment by the public. Tree Preservation Orders may be made where there are existing trees worthy of protection, and planning conditions will be imposed to ensure trees and hedgerows are adequately protected during construction. The Borough Council may prosecute if there is damage or destruction of such protected trees. GEP2: States that provision will be required to enable access for all (in particular for people with disabilities, the elderly and people with children) in new developments where there is public access, places of employment, public transport and car parking schemes and where practical in alterarations to existing developments. GEP3: States that in considering applications, regard will be given to the need for the design and layout to incorporate measures to reduce crime and the fear of crime. GEP6: States that developers should seek to incorporate energy efficiency principles through siting, form, orientation and layout of buildings as well as through surface drainage and the use of landscaping. 4.1 Planning 25.02.09 Pl anning apps 93
- Page 59 and 60: Planning Committee - 25 th February
- Page 61 and 62: 1 12 2 11 1 2 16 Planning Committee
- Page 63 and 64: Planning Committee - 25 th February
- Page 65 and 66: 18 Planning Committee - 25 th Febru
- Page 67 and 68: Planning Committee - 25 th February
- Page 69 and 70: Planning Committee - 25 th February
- Page 71 and 72: Planning Committee - 25 th February
- Page 73 and 74: Planning Committee - 25 th February
- Page 75 and 76: Planning Committee - 25 th February
- Page 77 and 78: Planning Committee - 25 th February
- Page 79 and 80: Planning Committee - 25 th February
- Page 81 and 82: Planning Committee - 25 th February
- Page 83 and 84: Planning Committee - 25 th February
- Page 85 and 86: Planning Committee - 25 th February
- Page 87 and 88: Planning Committee - 25 th February
- Page 89 and 90: 6 2 5 2 3 1 15 11 9 3 1 7 60 56 54
- Page 91 and 92: Planning Committee - 25 th February
- Page 93 and 94: Planning Committee - 25 th February
- Page 95 and 96: Planning Committee - 25 th February
- Page 97 and 98: Planning Committee - 25 th February
- Page 99 and 100: Planning Committee - 25 th February
- Page 101 and 102: 406 416 Planning Committee - 25 th
- Page 103 and 104: Planning Committee - 25 th February
- Page 105 and 106: Planning Committee - 25 th February
- Page 107 and 108: Planning Committee - 25 th February
- Page 109: Planning Committee - 25 th February
- Page 113 and 114: 188 192 93 303 1 305 1 3 16 29 23 3
- Page 115 and 116: 4.1 UPDATE REPORT No: 4 Number: H/2
- Page 117 and 118: 4.1 Application Reference No. : H/2
- Page 119 and 120: 4.1 In the interests of highway saf
- Page 121 and 122: 4.1 UPDATE REPORT No: 9 Number: H/2
- Page 123 and 124: 4.1 In the interests of the amenity
- Page 125 and 126: 4.1 Traffic & Transportation: Furth
- Page 127 and 128: advised however that current govern
- Page 129 and 130: as to account for these matters. Ho
- Page 131 and 132: 4.1 Vis ual Am enity 11.6 It is imp
- Page 133 and 134: 4.1 3 Unless otherwise agreed in wr
- Page 135 and 136: 4.1 Update Report No: 14 Number: H/
- Page 137 and 138: 4.1 Other matters 14.14 Members may
- Page 139 and 140: 4.1 UPDATE REPORT No: 15 Number: H/
- Page 141 and 142: 4.1 UPDATE REPORT No: 16 Number: H/
- Page 143 and 144: 4.1 Conclusion Although the buildin
- Page 145 and 146: Planning Committee 25 th February 2
- Page 147 and 148: Planning Committee 25 th February 2
- Page 149 and 150: Planning Committee - 25 th February
- Page 151 and 152: Planning Committee -25 th February
- Page 153 and 154: Planning Committee -25 th February
- Page 155 and 156: Planning Committee -25 th February
- Page 157 and 158: Planning Committee -25 th February
- Page 159 and 160: Planning Committee -25 th February
Planning Committee – 25 th February 2009 4.1<br />
4. size of development brings the building past the building line and is not in<br />
keeping with the character of the area<br />
5. affect the value of property<br />
6. unsympathetic<br />
7. the size of the proposed building is outrageously large for a residential area<br />
8. would appear oppressive as it looks like a factory or prison<br />
9. it will be intrusive and give rise to unacceptable degree of overshadowing and<br />
overlooking which will have an adverse effect on the living conditions of<br />
neighbouring properties<br />
10. would contravene the local plan which is to protect the effect on the amenities<br />
of the occupiers of adjoining properties i.e. general disturbance, loss of<br />
privacy, visual intrusion, dust, smell and vibration<br />
11. it would have a devastating effect on the traffic flow in Stockton Road<br />
12. the proposal would increase the number of residents but reduce the number<br />
of parking spaces<br />
13. significant increase in noise level from staff, vehicles, visitors and the general<br />
working environment of a busy large care home given the close proximity of<br />
the design to neighbouring private homes<br />
14. trees are to be removed yet the applicant states all existing mature trees<br />
would be retained<br />
15. not in keeping with the character and style of the existing buildings in the<br />
area, it will be too large<br />
16. the development will increase the traffic activity in the area which will have a<br />
detrimental effect both environmentally and noise wise<br />
17. the rear of this large building will only be some 10 metres from the side of my<br />
house. It will affect our privacy<br />
18. will adversely affect the amount of daylight and sunlight in the rooms on the<br />
adjoining side of our house<br />
19. problems with blocked drains, increased demands will lead to more frequent<br />
blockages<br />
20. too big<br />
21. unnecessary<br />
22. parking proposed inadequate<br />
23. construction dirt and noise<br />
24. obstruction of view/light into objectors home<br />
25. invasion of privacy<br />
26. noise, traffic and pollution during building<br />
27. does not feel that proprietors maintain grounds to high enough standards at<br />
present and this problem will be escalated<br />
28. overpowering<br />
29. changing the use from a small residential home to a very large commercial<br />
business<br />
30. overbearing and threatening to adjacent properties<br />
31. what do we need another care home<br />
32. what happens if the business fails, like Tanfield Nursing home will this<br />
development be converted into flats?<br />
33. blot on the landscape<br />
34. block out light<br />
Copy Letters F<br />
4.1 Planning 25.02.09 Pl anning apps 92
Change language