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 No: 4 Number: H/2008/0531 Applicant: Mr MATT MATHARU STATION LANE H ARTLEPOOL TS25 1BG Agent: S J R Architects Suite 101 The Innovation Centre Venture Court Queens Meadow Business Park HARTLEPOOL TS25 5TG Date valid: 08/09/2008 Development: Outline application for the erection of a 30 bed residential care home with associated car parking Location: 34 STATION LANE H ARTLEPOOL H ARTLEPOOL The Application and Site 4.1 The application site is located on Station Lane in Seaton Carew on a main link road into and out of Seaton Carew. 4.2 The site is approximately 0.12 hectares in size and accommodates a 3 storey double fronted Victorian property, which was converted into a residential care home in 1987 (under application H/FUL/0520/87). In 1988 an application was approved for a 2 storey extension to the rear (H/FUL/0022/88). A smaller infill extension was approved in 1997 (H/FUL/0235/97). 4.3 There have been 2 recent outline applications associated with the proposal to demolish the existing care home and rebuild: 4.4 H/2007/0759 comprised an application for a 29 bed residential care home. This was withdrawn by the agent as there were concerns from the case officer regarding the scale and design of the proposal. 4.5 H/2008/0213 comprised an application for a 32 bed care home. This was refused on the grounds that the scale proposed would be overbearing and detrimental to the occupiers of neighbouring properties in terms of visual intrusion, dominance, overlooking and loss of outlook. It was also considered that the scale of the home proposed would not provide amenity space to meet the needs of residents commensurate with the size of the building. 4.6 The current application proposes the demolition of the existing building and the erection of a 30 bedroom care home, which is shown to be 3 storey at the front then 2 storey at the rear. However these details are illustrative as the application is in outline with all matters reserved for later approval. 4.7 The applicant has provided a design and access statement which states that the current building does not comply with many of the requirements set out by the current Care Home Regulations. The statement also states that attracting new residents has been lost to competition from newer built homes within the surrounding area and subsequently a lack of investment has resulted. 4.1 Planning 25.02.09 Pl anning apps 24
Planning Committee – 25 th February 2009 4.1 Publicity 4.8 The application has been advertised by way of neighbour letters (10). To date, there have been 1 letter of no objection and 2 letters of objection. The concerns raised are: 1. loss of light 2. concerns re: landscaping as boundary wall is already badly damaged from previous planting 3. out of keeping with surrounding buildings 4. set precedent for a destroy and rebuild 5. the size of the building is out of character with the surroundings 6. car parking will be a nightmare Copy letters B 4.9 The period for publicity expires before the Planning Committee, should any further representations be received they will be reported accordingly. Consultations 4.10 The following consultation replies have been received: Traffic & Transportation – no objection Public Protection – no objection Engineering Consultancy – no objection subject to a condition regarding contamination. Director of Adult & Community Services – awaiting comments Cleveland Police – comments regarding secured by design Planning Policy 4.11 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. 4.1 Planning 25.02.09 Pl anning apps 25
- Page 1 and 2: PLANNING COMMITTEE AGENDA MEMBERS O
- Page 3 and 4: Planning Committee - Minutes and De
- Page 5 and 6: Planning Committee - Minutes and De
- Page 7 and 8: Planning Committee - Minutes and De
- Page 9 and 10: Planning Committee - Minutes and De
- Page 11 and 12: Planning Committee - Minutes and De
- Page 13 and 14: Planning Committee - Minutes and De
- Page 15 and 16: Planning Committee - Minutes and De
- Page 17 and 18: Planning Committee - Minutes and De
- Page 19 and 20: Planning Committee - 25 th February
- Page 21 and 22: Planning Committee - 25 th February
- Page 23 and 24: Planning Committee - 25 th February
- Page 25 and 26: Planning Committee - 25 th February
- Page 27 and 28: Planning Committee - 25 th February
- Page 29 and 30: Planning Committee - 25 th February
- Page 31 and 32: Planning Committee - 25 th February
- Page 33 and 34: Planning Committee - 25 th February
- Page 35 and 36: Planning Committee - 25 th February
- Page 37 and 38: Planning Committee - 25 th February
- Page 39 and 40: Planning Committee - 25 th February
- Page 41: Def Planning Committee - 25 th Febr
- Page 45 and 46: Planning Committee - 25 th February
- Page 47 and 48: 1 2 1 7 16 2 Planning Committee - 2
- Page 49 and 50: Planning Committee - 25 th February
- Page 51 and 52: Planning Committee - 25 th February
- Page 53 and 54: Planning Committee - 25 th February
- Page 55 and 56: Planning Committee - 25 th February
- Page 57 and 58: 9 41 D ef RH 1 16 4 5 13 Planning C
- 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
Planning Committee – 25 th February 2009 4.1<br />
Publicity<br />
4.8 The application has been advertised by way of neighbour letters (10). To date,<br />
there have been 1 letter of no objection and 2 letters of objection.<br />
The concerns raised are:<br />
1. loss of light<br />
2. concerns re: landscaping as boundary wall is already badly damaged from<br />
previous planting<br />
3. out of keeping with surrounding buildings<br />
4. set precedent for a destroy and rebuild<br />
5. the size of the building is out of character with the surroundings<br />
6. car parking will be a nightmare<br />
Copy letters B<br />
4.9 The period for publicity expires before the Planning Committee, should any<br />
further representations be received they will be reported accordingly.<br />
Consultations<br />
4.10 The following consultation replies have been received:<br />
Traffic & Transportation – no objection<br />
Public Protection – no objection<br />
Engineering Consultancy – no objection subject to a condition regarding<br />
contamination.<br />
Director of Adult & Community Services – awaiting comments<br />
Cleveland Police – comments regarding secured by design<br />
Planning Policy<br />
4.11 The following policies in the adopted <strong>Hartlepool</strong> Local Plan 2006 are relevant to<br />
the determination of this application:<br />
GEP1: States that in determining planning applications the <strong>Borough</strong> <strong>Council</strong> will<br />
have due regard to the provisions of the Development Plan. Development should be<br />
located on previously developed land within the limits to development and outside<br />
the green wedges. The policy also highlights the wide range of matters which will<br />
be taken into account including appearance and relationship with surroundings,<br />
effects on amenity, highway safety, car parking, infrastructure, flood risk, trees,<br />
landscape features, wildlife and habitats, the historic environment, and the need for<br />
high standards of design and landscaping and native species.<br />
4.1 Planning 25.02.09 Pl anning apps 25
Change language