Plans refused for garage expansion near Leamside Line over newt fears and other concerns

Sunderland City Council’s planning department has refused a planning application for a parcel of open space at the Swan Road Industrial Estate, near the mothballed Leamside railway line in Washington.

Plans sought permission for a two-storey factory unit to serve established business Washington Accident and Repair, which already operates from a unit nearby.

According to a design and access statement submitted to council officials, the proposed factory unit included ‘attached offices’ and vehicle parking with the wider site surrounded by a proposed two-metre-high perimeter fence.

The factory unit, with a 598.56 sqm floor area and height of 7.45 metres, would have been used for minor repair works such as lights, windscreens and bodywork scratches.

Following several rounds of public consultation however, around 15 objections were submitted to the city council as well as a petition with 52 signatures.

Concerns included visual impacts on nearby residents, impacts on local wildlife, loss of privacy and other concerns about loss of trees, increased noise and traffic and highway safety.

According to council documents several ward councillors also raised concerns, including queries about how the unit would operate and impacts on residents in the area.

The plans were initially received in 2019 with time extensions being granted by local authority planners, as well as an amendment to the site address.

After considering the planning application and assessing it against planning policies, Sunderland City Council’s planning department refused it on March 30, 2023.

A council decision report listed several reasons for refusal, including the design, scale and position of boundary fencing appearing as “unsympathetic and highly intrusive within the context of the existing street scene”.

Council planners said the application “did not provide sufficient detail to demonstrate how the development will deliver net gains in biodiversity, provide ecological mitigation and enhancements at the site or avoid or minimise adverse impacts on biodiversity”.

This included the “risk of impacts on great crested newts, which are known to be present in the area”.

Another reason for refusal included highway and pedestrian safety concerns as the application did not provide a “segregated pedestrian/vehicle access” and failed to “demonstrate that servicing and delivery arrangements are acceptable”.

The council decision report added: “Although the proposal has been found to be acceptable in principle […] it has been found to be unacceptable with regard to visual amenity, ecology and highway and pedestrian safety.

“The council has repeatedly requested additional information from the applicant to assist with resolving the outstanding issues, however after agreeing several time extensions on the application to enable this to be submitted, the additional information has not been forthcoming.

“The application must therefore be determined in light of the information available to the council at this time and as detailed in this report, there remain significant outstanding concerns in relation to visual amenity, ecology and highway and pedestrian safety”.

The applicant has the right to challenge Sunderland City Council’s planning decision by lodging an appeal with the Secretary of State.

For more information on the planning application and council decision, visit Sunderland City Council’s online planning portal and search reference: 19/00269/FUL