Sunderland caravan storage site plan refused over biodiversity and ecology concerns

At a meeting this week, Sunderland City Council’s Planning and Highways Committee refused an application for land at the Dubmire Industrial Estate.

The site is based north of Mulberry Way in the Houghton ward and applicant Jay Storage Ltd had applied for permission for the ‘open air storage’ of caravans.

In addition an existing portable building was planned to be used for office facilities at the site, as well as the provision of staff and visitor parking spaces.

The development initially proposed 306 caravan bays, however amended site plans submitted to the council in June 2023, reduced the number of bays to around 188.

After considering the planning bid, council planning officials recommended it for refusal as it clashed with a policy in the council’s Core Strategy and Development Plan, or ‘local plan’, around biodiversity.

The policy uses a metric to calculate the net loss or net gains in biodiversity at sites linked to planning applications.

At a meeting to decide the caravan storage application on July 31, 2023, at City Hall, councillors heard that the proposed development would lead to a “significant loss in biodiversity of 22.32 biodiversity units”.

This biodiversity loss was calculated based on the habitats that existed on the site in January, 2020, prior to site clearance works that were undertaken.

In a report presented to councillors, it was argued that the plan would have a “significant adverse impact on the value and integrity of the wildlife corridor that the application site forms a part”.

Councillors heard that the refusal recommendation was linked to the applicant clearing the site of its natural vegetation prior to development.

Even with new ecological enhancements to the site proposed by the applicant, it was noted that the applicant would have to pay a large sum towards off-site mitigation works to make the development acceptable.

A representative for the applicant spoke at the meeting and apologised for the early site clearance, noting they had carried out similar activities a decade ago and were “wrongly assured” it wouldn’t be an issue to do so again.

The representative said the caravan storage scheme would help secure the site, create jobs and tackle anti-social behaviour, and had been recommended for refusal on a “technicality” around ecology issues.

It was noted that ecological features, including three ponds, tree planting, native hedges and areas of meadow grass, had been provided as well as the development’s scale being reduced to “maximise this ecological provision”.

However council planning officers defended their position and stressed the developer’s decision to clear the site had led to the significant biodiversity loss.

Councillors were told that biodiversity net gain was going to be a “big issue” that affects planning applications across the country, with Central Government expected to make it mandatory later this year.

Following a question from Planning and Highways Committee member councillor Michael Dixon, council planners said it would be a “challenge” to make the Houghton employment site acceptable in biodiversity terms.

This included an estimated sum of around £300,000 of off-site biodiversity net gain compensation to “make inroads” into the loss of biodiversity on the site.

It was noted that the applicant’s agent had confirmed this would make the scheme “unviable”.

Councillor Stephen Foster added: “The applicant said it was a technicality but the way the planning officer has put it over, I think we’re left with no option [but to refuse].

“It’s a massive technicality really.”

Councillor Mark Burrell, Houghton ward councillor, also attended the meeting raising concerns about the impact on residents, increased traffic and the loss of wildlife.

After being put to the vote, the Planning and Highways Committee voted unanimously to refuse the plans.

The applicant has the right to challenge the council’s refusal by lodging an appeal with the Secretary of State.