Agenda and minutes

Note: The Chair delayed the start of the meeting to 10:10am due to technological issues.

There were no apologies received.

To confirm the minutes of the meeting held on 14 August 2025 as an accurate record.

The minutes of the meeting held on Thursday, 14 August 2025 were confirmed by Members and signed by the Chair as an accurate record.

All Members are invited to declare at this point any interests, including the nature of those interests, or lobbying in respect of any items appearing on this agenda.

Councillor Kevin Foster declared that he felt they had been lobbied during the site visit in respect of item 5 on the agenda.

Report Of The Head of Development Management – Community Development Services

Considered :-

The Head of Development Management - Community Development Services sought determination of a planning application for full planning permission for proposed demolition, extension and refurbishment of existing care home to form 36 bed care home with the erection of two-storey care home with associated access and car parking at Morris Grange Nursing Home, Middleton Tyas, Richmond, DL10 6NX.

The Planning Officer summarised the report to the committee.

During consideration of the above application, the Committee discussed the following issues:-

·       In response to a question on passing places, the Officer clarified that since the original proposal, the applicant had introduced passing places to their application as seen in the report. Their location and size had not changed at any time and had the approval from Highways..

·       Members noted the loss of the North/South access to residents.

Following clarification of the resolution by the Legal Officer, Members voted on the proposal.

The Decision :-

That planning permission be GRANTED subject to prior completion of a S106 agreement and the conditions as listed in the Committee Report.

Voting Record

A vote was taken and the motion was carried unanimously.

Report Of The Head of Development Management– Community Development  Services  

Considered :-

The Head of Development Management - Community Development Services sought determination of a planning application for outline planning application for 25 plots for self and custom-build residential development and associated works (all matters reserved including access) at land off James Lane, Tunstall, North Yorkshire.

Note: In response to Cllr Foster’s declaration that there had been lobbying during the site visit, the Chair and Cllr Moorhouse declared they felt they had not been lobbied during the site visit.

The Planning Officer summarised the report and update report which had been published to the Council website as item 5a of the agenda pack. The Officer advised that the issue with drainage and flooding was the lack of information to prove there was a suitable place to discharge surface water; either via infiltration testing or surveys of the ditch/ waterway running along the sites northern boundary.

The applicant’s agent, Jason Tait, spoke in support of the application.

During consideration of the above application, the Committee discussed the following issues:-

·        The remoteness of the development in relation to nearby amenities.

·        That the development would not look in situ next to the nearby garage and barracks.

·        Whether self-build and custom-build houses were compatible with what the area needed.

·        Members sought clarity on the development limit, and how the site was situated in relation to its boundary. The Officer explained that the limit had been carried forward from the previous Local Plan and that the policy required new developments’ to be near or adjacent to this limit. The Officer directed Members towards where the limit of the policy area and strategic growth direction was, and concluded the site stood outside of these areas.

·        In response to Member questions on flood risk and mitigation the Officer stated there was not enough information at that moment to guarantee whether there could or could not be a suitable water attenuation area on the site.

·        That the road posed a danger to the footpath as it was too narrow.

·        The reasons for the absence of an affordable housing plan in the application. The Officer explained that an affordable housing plan could be submitted by the applicant in the heads of terms or included in the covering letter or planning statement. The decision to develop these plans further was dependent on whether the principle of development was first deemed acceptable. In this case, the application being considered did not include an affordable housing plan at this outline stage.

The Decision :-

That planning permission be REFUSED.

The Committee agreed with the reasons for refusal put forward by the Principal Planning Officer as set out below:-

1. The application site is located outside and not adjacent to the development limits or the built up extent of Catterick Garrison, and is within the open countryside. The site is a located a significant distance from the nearest services and facilities within Catterick Garrison as well as the nearest transport links. As such, the site is considered to be an unsustainable location  ...  view the full minutes text for item 21.

Report of the Head of Development Management – Community Development Services

Considered :-

The Head of Development Management - Community Development Services sought determination of a planning application for the variation of condition 2 attached to planning reference zd24/00303/var to relocate the building and minor elevational and specification changes affecting external appearance and hard and soft landscaping areas and removal of condition 22 parts b and d only at land to the east of 42-44, Richmond Road, Catterick Garrison, North Yorkshire.

The Planning Officer summarised the report and update report which had been published to the Council website as item 6a of the agenda pack.

During consideration of the above application, the Committee discussed the following issues:-

·       That over the duration of the application’s development there had been an increase in costs and change in Government.

·       The reduction was unfortunate but overall, the changes to the application were minor.

The Decision :-

That planning permission be GRANTED subject to conditions detailed in the Committee report.

Voting Record

A vote was taken and the motion was carried unanimously.

Any other items which the Chair agrees should be considered as a matter of urgency because of special circumstances.

There were no urgent items of business.

10.00am, Thursday, 13 November 2025

Thursday, 13 November at 10.00am