Appeal 6003444

The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for removal of 2no stables and the construction of 1no dwelling with associated detached garage and proposed works to the driveway in accordance with the terms of the application Ref 25/02065/FUL and the plans submitted with it, subject to the conditions in the attached schedule.

The first main issue is the effect of the proposal on the development strategy for the area with regard to the provision of allotments. The second is the effect of the proposal on the character and appearance of the area.

The evidence indicates that the site is covered by a greenspace designation relating to allotments and community gardens within the Sunderland Green Space Audit.

However, whilst there is some indication of allotment use to the north-west of the appeal site, the site itself is not within allotment use, hosting a gravelled area, grass and stables.

Satellite imagery dating from 2001 does not indicate allotment use at the appeal site and therefore there does not appear to have been allotment use for a significant period of time and there is nothing firm before me to counter this position.

The evidence further suggests that the appellant has owned the land for many decades and there is a suggestion that the land has never been used as allotments, although this is not proven within the evidence. In any event, there appears little prospect that any historic allotment use, should it have ever existed could be easily reinstated.

The areas of land further along to the rear of terraced properties on [address] do not appear to be within allotment use, rather many of those areas of land appeared to be in use as private gardens when I made a visit to the site and surrounding area.

Given this, there would be no loss of allotment or community gardens associated with the proposal, nor would there be a splintering of green space, as the land further along also does not appear to be in allotment use.

However, the land is covered by a greenspace designation and I cannot rule out historical use of the site as allotments. Because of this, there would therefore be some conflict with the development strategy for the area with regard to greenspace. There would be conflict with Policy NE4 of the [name] and Development Plan (2020) (CS) which amongst other things seeks the protection, conservation and enhancement of the quality, community value, function and accessibility of greenspace and wider green infrastructure.

The terraced properties set along [address] and within the immediately surrounding streets set a strong, linear pattern of residential development. However, the pattern of development of buildings closely to the east on [address] and [address] are much less regular, indicating that there is not one form of development layout which is dominant within the immediate area. The existing buildings at and around the site, whilst lesser in scale to the proposed dwelling are present in a range of form, size and materials and have served to extend the developed envelope of the settlement further back and in a different form from the terraced properties on [address].

Within that setting, the proposal would form a differing, but not visually unacceptable feature. The proposed dwelling would not be excessively scaled and would incorporate a pitched roof as is characteristic for the area. Within this context, the proposal would have no unacceptable adverse impact on the character or appearance of the area.

There would therefore be no conflict with Policy BH1 of the CS which amongst other things seeks that development should create places which have a clear function, character and identity based upon a robust understanding of local context, constraints and distinctiveness and be of a scale, massing, layout, appearance and setting which respects and enhances the positive qualities of nearby properties and the locality.

I note that the proposal seeks to provide some allotment use within the site. This would include amongst other things the incorporation of communal and private allotment areas and the planting of new fruit trees. Whilst that provision would be a welcome benefit, this matter has been afforded no weight in my decision given that there is limited information before me as to how this arrangement would work in practical terms.

A list of suggested conditions has not been supplied and those that are included are drawn from consultee responses that have been provided to me. Conditions 1 and 2 are necessary to define the proposal. Conditions 3-8 are necessary to ensure that contamination does not pose any unacceptable risk to the site. Condition 9 is necessary to ensure that domestic waste is adequately managed. Condition 10 is necessary in the interests of biodiversity. Condition 11 is necessary in the interests of the living conditions of nearby occupiers.

There is nothing to indicate that a Construction Management Plan specifically relating to Biodiversity matters is necessary given the limited scale of the proposal and the current status of the site and a condition with regard to that matter is therefore not necessary.

The proposal would conflict with Policy NE4 of the CS and the proposal would conflict with the development plan as a whole. However, given there does not appear to have been allotment use for a significant period of time and there is nothing to indicate that any possible historic allotment use would recommence, the conflict with Policy NE4 in this particular case is afforded limited weight.

There would be benefits to the proposal, including the provision of one dwelling which would benefit housing supply and which would have the usual economic and social benefits associated with a scheme of this type.

In this instance, the benefits of the proposal would outweigh the harm and considerations therefore indicate a decision should be made otherwise than in accordance with the development plan.

The appeal should therefore be allowed.

The development hereby permitted shall begin not later than 3 years from the date of this decision.

The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans: L025067-001, L025067-002, L025067-003, L025067-004, L025067-005, L025067-006, L025067-007 & L025067-008.

No development other than demolition shall commence until a suitable and sufficient ground investigation and Risk Assessment undertaken by a competent person to assess the nature and extent of any contamination on the site (whether or not it originates on the site) has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The report of the findings must include: i) a survey of the extent, scale and nature of contamination; ii) an assessment of the potential risks to: -human health -property (existing or proposed) including buildings, crops, livestock, pets, woodland and service lines and pipes; -adjoining land; -ground waters and surface waters; -ecological systems; -archaeological sites and ancient monuments; and iii) where unacceptable risks are identified, an appraisal of remedial options, and proposal of the preferred option(s). The Investigation and Risk Assessment shall be implemented as approved and must be conducted in accordance with the Environment Agency's "Land contamination: risk management".

No development, other than demolition, shall commence until a detailed [name] to bring the site to a condition suitable for the intended use (by removing unacceptable risks to human health, buildings and other property and the natural and historical environment) has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The Remediation Scheme should be prepared in accordance with the Environment Agency’s “[name]: [name]” and must include a suitable options appraisal, all works to be undertaken, proposed remediation objectives, remediation criteria, a timetable of works, site management procedures and a plan for validating the remediation works. The Remediation Scheme must ensure that as a minimum, the site will not qualify as contaminated land under Part 2A of the Environmental Protection Act 1990 in relation to the intended use of the land after remediation. Once the [name] has been approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority it shall be known as the [name].

The Approved Remediation Scheme shall be implemented in accordance with the approved timetable of works. Within six months of the completion of measures identified in the [name] and prior to the occupation of the building, a [name] (that demonstrates the effectiveness of the remediation carried out) must be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

In the event that contamination is found at any time when carrying out the approved development that was not previously identified it must be reported in writing immediately to the Local Planning Authority. A Risk Assessment must be undertaken in accordance with the requirements of the Environment Agency's "[name]: [name]" and where remediation is necessary a [name] must be prepared and submitted to the Local Planning Authority in accordance with the requirements that the [name] must ensure that the site will not qualify as contaminated land under Part 2A of the Environmental Protection Act 1990 in relation to the intended use of the land after remediation. Once the [name] has been approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority it shall be known as the [name]. Following completion of measures identified in the [name] a verification report must be prepared and submitted in accordance with the approved timetable of works. Within six months of the completion of measures identified in the [name] and prior to the occupation of any building, a validation report (that demonstrates the effectiveness of the remediation carried out) must be submitted to the Local Planning Authority.

No works of construction shall be commenced until a verification report detailing the position of all boreholes installed for the investigation of soils, ground gases, groundwater or geotechnical purposes (including grouting), has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The verification report shall detail how redundant boreholes have been decommissioned and how any borehole that needs to be retained, post-development, for monitoring purposes will be secured, protected and inspected.

Prior to the first occupation of the dwelling a report demonstrating and evidencing the effective sealing of the internal annulus of all service duct penetrations through gas resistant membranes against potential ground gas ingress shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. 9.Prior to the first occupation of the proposed dwelling details of a refuse storage and servicing strategy shall be submitted to and agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall proceed in accordance with the agreed strategy.

No development shall proceed otherwise than in accordance with the recommendations outlined within section 6 of the Ecological Impact Assessment by Dendra Consulting Ltd dated October 2025.

No development shall proceed otherwise than in accordance with the Construction Management Plan dated September 2025.