LIGHT and noise pollution, traffic safety and the height of new warehouses were among the chief worries raised during a public consultation about a dale firm’s expansion plans.
Technimark is proposing to build two warehouses in a field adjoining its site along Gas Lane, in Middleton-in-Teesdale, sparking concerns, particularly from people living in neighbouring historic leadminer cottages along Newtown. As a result of the public reaction county planners organised an online meeting last week for people to air their views.
Planning officer Amy Williamson said 25 letters of objection had been received, along with ten letters of support. Explaining the need to expand the site, Technimark managing director Stephen Shaw said the company had grown from a turnover of £4million in 2015 to £10million in 2020 and it now had limited storage capacity.
He explained that a new warehouse closest to the cottages would be similar in height to the existing warehouse, and another towards the middle of the site would be about eight metres at its highest point. Mr Shaw added: “The reason we look for the extra height is because it is a warehouse and obviously the more we can stack, the more we can store in a smaller footprint.”
Furthermore, he said the new warehouses were similar in size to other nearby buildings including Middleton-in-Teesdale Auction Mart, Middleton Forge and Hyperdrug.
Mr Shaw said if the expansion goes ahead it would eliminate many current complaints about light and noise pollution. He said: “We do have people working outside at night purely because we are so busy and crammed – we have to have forklifts and people moving between the buildings late on an evening or through the night. In a future state, in a new facility, that would all be under one roof. The lighting and the noise from forklifts would be negated significantly.”
He also said traffic to and from the site would not rise dramatically because more products would be put on wagons arriving at the site than currently. He added: “We do have vehicles coming back and forth for storage.
“If we have more storage, we wouldn’t have those vehicles coming backwards and forwards – we would actually reduce some traffic.”
Alan Matthews, speaking for the people living in the historic cottages, said the original industrial site along Gas Lane had been designed for cottage industries and were single storey buildings constructed in a way that was sympathetic to the conservation areas. He added: “The county council has seemingly to have allowed Technimark to bulldoze that concept of low-level buildings, adding new ones of increasing height.
“It is this overshadowing of the gardens [that is a problem]. Sunrise is going to be lost for an hour or so and it is going to put shadows across the gardens for much of the morning until the sun goes to the south. It is a loss of amenity. It is not acceptable.”
Principal planning officer for Durham County Council Steven Pilkington confirmed that residential amenity is an important planning consideration. A similar concern about the industrial estate’s growth was raised by Lindsay Waddell who said: “It has more or less been development by stealth and given the current growth rate of this company one of my main fears is this will not be the end of it.”
Mr Wardell dismissed Mr Shaw’s comparison of the warehouses to, among others, the auction mart, because none of those buildings are located next to historic buildings and a conservation area.
Jill Smith was also worried that Technimark would continue to grow and in future apply to build on the remainder of the neighbouring field.
She suggested the county council work with Technimark to relocate the firm nearby at Harmire or Stainton Grove industrial estates to save jobs if the application is not approved.
In contrast to other neighbours’ complaints about light pollution, Brenda Turner said a warehouse built by Technimark in 2013 had blocked out streetlamps that had shone further down Gas Lane where she lives. She said: “In one case we get the security light through our bedroom window all night, so I hope you are rectifying that, but the height of it [the new warehouses] is going to block out any streetlight we get.
“We are the only house down here and it seems to us that it doesn’t matter about us because we didn’t even get a notice about the 2013 warehouse going up. It just appeared.”
She further complained that when two wagons arrive at Technimark at the same time, one of them will park in the lane to load or offload.
Mr Shaw agreed to change the security light so it would no longer be a problem, and add lights to make the lane safe at night. He added that the firm does not condone wagons parking in the lane, and if the proposal is approved the problem would go away. Mr Pilkington noted that the lower part of Gas Lane is beyond the council adopted highway.
Resident Judith Tarn appealed to Technimark to revise its plans and this was an opportunity for the company to produce something unique and award-winning.
She said: “A revised plan wouldn’t overshadow the cottages and it would take the work of the London Lead Company (which built the cottages) into account. That company left a positive legacy in the village and Technimark should aspire to do the same and build something of sustainable value being sensitive to the area they inhabit.”
Mr Shaw responded by saying the firm had limited funding for the expansion and had to take into account its responsibility to the company’s investors.
Nicky Hough, who works for Technimark and is a member of the village’s parish council, described the company’s deep commitment to the community and pointed out that apart from giving employment to local people, it has added spin-off benefits by using local tradesmen and builders to work on site, and visitors to the company helped fill rooms in the village’s hotels.
Steven Woolford was worried about the light impact on the North Pennines Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB). He added: “There doesn’t appear to be any comment from Highways on traffic and I find that slightly perplexing.”
Ms Williamson responded: “We have received some comments from Highways, but they have requested some clarification around numbers of vehicles and we will be going back to them for further comments.”
She added that the planning application will be decided by a planning committee meeting on March 22.
