The Area Planning Committee (North) is scheduled to meet to discuss planning applications and the minutes of their previous meeting. The main item for consideration is an application concerning a property in South Moor.

Land To The East Of 2 Standish Street, South Moor

The committee will be considering planning application DM/25/02562/FPA, which concerns land to the east of 2 Standish Street in South Moor. The application from Mr John Purvis seeks permission for a change of use of residential garage to 1 No. dwelling house (C3) with parking and garden .

The planning officer's report states that the proposal is largely identical to a scheme that was recently refused in September 2025. The planning officer is recommending that the committee refuse the application for three reasons:

• The development would have an adverse impact upon the character and appearance of the area.
• The proposal would provide a poor standard of amenity to future occupiers of the dwelling.
• The scheme fails to demonstrate that safe and suitable access would be achieved.

The report notes that the Highways Authority has objected to the scheme because it fails to demonstrate that safe and suitable access would be achieved, in line with the necessary highway standards. The applicant has been informed of this, but has not amended the scheme to address the Highways Authority's concerns.

The planning officer's report also claims that the proposal would not relate well to the existing built-form and would represent inappropriate development of poor design at odds with the layout and character of the surrounding area. It also says that the scheme is deemed to provide an insufficient level of amenity to future occupiers of the dwelling in terms of light, outlook and privacy.

The report acknowledges that the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) is a key material planning consideration, and that because the council does not have a five-year housing land supply¹, the tilted balance in paragraph 11(d) of the NPPF applies, reducing the weight of County Durham Plan (CDP) Policy 6. However, the report concludes that the provision of 1 No. dwelling would deliver extremely modest economic and social benefits, which would not outweigh the harm in the overall planning balance .

The planning officer's report notes that Councillor John Cook requested that the application be considered by the committee because the revised proposal provides mitigation against previous objections under Policies 6 and 29 of the County Durham Plan, and because of the complex planning history of the site. Councillor Cook also noted that there is a local interest in the outcome of the application with regard to affordable housing provision and site regeneration, and that issues relating to precedent concerns should also be debated in a public forum.

The planning officer's report includes a statement from the applicant, which claims that the statutory local authority consultees have not considered any of the amendments made to the application. The applicant also claims that the Council's Highways Engineer is applying guidance that has no legal basis, and that the development seeks to reduce the vehicular access and egress points from two separate former garage plots to just one, halving any vehicle incursions on this section of road to improve upon what has already been agreed by the Authority. The applicant also states that there is no record of any objections by residents or other external consultees to either the first application detailing the construction of the garage or the two more recent applications for the change of use, and that there have however, been numerous letters of support by neighbouring property inhabitants and Council Members.

Minutes of the Previous Meeting

The committee will also be asked to approve the minutes of the meeting held on 18 December 2025. These minutes include a discussion of planning application DM/25/01765/FPA for the Site of Former Go North East Bus Garage, Picktree Lane, Picktree, which was approved subject to conditions. The application was for the erection of a foodstore (Use Class E²) with associated access, parking, servicing area and landscaping. The minutes note that Tesco had objected to the application, but that the applicant had agreed to a condition restricting the use to limited product line deep discount retailing of no more than 3,500 individual product lines.