Planning Committee Wednesday 9 May 2012 at 7.00 Pm

Planning Committee Wednesday 9 May 2012 at 7.00 pm

Council Chamber, Swanspool House, Doddington Road, Wellingborough, Northamptonshire NN8 1BP

1. Apologies for absence. Ι 2. Declarations of Interest. Ι 3. Confirmation of the minutes of the meeting held on 04/04/2012. Ι 4. Applications for planning permission, listed building consent, building regulation approval and appeals information. 5. Any other items that the Chairman decides are urgent. Ι Enclosed

Site Viewing Group for Tuesday 8 May 2012 will be Councillors Ward, Griffiths, Waters, Timms and Maguire.

John T Campbell Chief Executive

Date issued: 30 April 2012.

For further information contact Fiona Marshall on 01933 231519; fax 01933 231543; [email protected]

If you wish to address the Committee on an agenda item you can register by: • going on-line to ‘on-line forms’ then ‘addressing Council meetings’; or • completing the appropriate form which is available at reception desks; or • contacting Fiona Marshall.

Membership: Councillor Ward (Chairman), Councillor Griffiths (Vice Chairman), Councillors Beirne, Bell, Dholakia, Maguire, Morrall, B Patel, Scarborough, Timms and Waters.

Swanspool House, Doddington Road, Wellingborough, Northamptonshire NN8 1BP Tel: 01933 229777 Fax: 01933 231684 www.wellingborough.gov.uk Agenda item 4

Borough Council of Wellingborough Planning Committee Wednesday 9th May 2012 at 7.00 pm Council Chamber, Swanspool House

INDEX

Page No. SITE VIEWING GROUP

WP/2012/0093/F 46 Dowthorpe Hill, Earls Barton. 1 WP/2012/0134/FCOU - 10 High Street, Irchester. 8

DISTRICT

WP/2011/0280/FM - Eagle Public House, 12 14 Olympic Way, Wellingborough. 14 WP/2011/0556/FM - 159 Duke of York, Northampton Road, Wellingborough. 22 WP/2012/0094/F - Land adjacent 10 Doddington Road, Wilby. 38 WP/2012/0154/TC - Outside Central Hall Buildings, 1a High Street, Wellingborough. 46 WP/2012/0188/F - 15 Gray Close, Earls Barton. 50

OTHER BOROUGH

WP/2012/0068/OB - Land adjacent Skew Bridge Ski Slope, Northampton Road, Rushden. 61

FOR INFORMATION

WP/2011/0108/OB - Arable field at Cranford, Nr Kettering. 71 WP/2011/0406/OB Land at Glendon Farm, Nr Burton Latimer. 76 WP/2012/0008/C - (Larner Pallets), 3 4 Bevan Close, Wellingborough. 85

- 1 -

BOROUGH COUNCIL OF WELLINGBOROUGH

SITE VIEWING (Date of visit Tuesday 8th May 2012 at 10.50 a.m.)

Planning Committee 09/05/2012

Report of the Head of Planning and Development

APPLICATION REF: WP/2012/0093/F

PROPOSAL: Removal of existing roof to bungalow and construction of new roof with 2 no. bedrooms, bathroom and access stairs in new roof space.

LOCATION: 46 Dowthorpe Hill, Earls Barton, Northampton. NN6 0PB

APPLICANT: Mr and Mrs S Greenhow.

PROPOSAL AND DESCRIPTION OF SITE: As described above.

The development site is situated in the southern region of the Limited Development village policy line envelope of Earls Barton on the south side of Dowthorpe Hill. The rear of the property faces out on to open countryside and is the penultimate property at the eastern end of a row of 10 detached single storey dwellings, all of which constructed circa 1960s and in the same style. The land to the rear of the property slopes steeply southwards, whereas the road upon which it is located has a gradual fall from east to west. The property is set back from the highway with a small front garden and driveway to the side. The prevailing street scene along this side of Dowthorpe Hill from Allebone Road to No. 48 Dowthorpe Hill is of a series of bungalows with pitched roofs and gable ends facing the street. The front building line is staggered, but the roof ridge height line is of a gradual procession up from Allebone Road with no stepping down in heights between adjacent properties. Thus a pleasing smooth roof ridge height line is presented to the wider public. Noticeably, all of the properties in this row of ten share the same angle of pitch to their roof slopes.

It is accepted that the appearance of the two storey dwellings on the north side of the street are of an eclectic mix of styles, due partly from previous planning consents for extensions to the front and side. Also accepted is the fact that the first property, known as No. 1 Allebone Road, in the row of ten bungalows of which the development site is apart is the only property with a dormer in its western roof slope. However, none of the 10 properties have dormers on their eastern roof slopes.

Planning permission is being sought to extend into the roof space to accommodate first floor habitable rooms. This extension into the roof space would entail raising the eaves, roof slopes and roof ridge above the established heights of its neighbouring properties. Consequently, the angles of the proposed roof slopes will be increased from approximately 35 degrees to 40 degrees and the highway facing gable will be elongated 25a

DOWTHORPEWP/2012/0093/F END 3

38 28

37 23 7

20 8 1 11

30 MOUNT PLEASANT

11 8b Thorpe 9

8 House

12 9a 30

13 17 16

5 SHEFFIELD 32

2 20 CLOSE

WAY SHURVILLE 24

16 1

13 15 33 21 27 23

DOWTHORPE HILL

68 30

54 44

2 32

ALLEBONEROAD 8

Path (um)

Planning & Local Development © Crown Copyright and database right 2012. Scale: Ordnance Survey 100018694. Legend This map is accurate 1:1,250 Cities Revealed to the scale specified Aerial Photography copyright: when reproduced at A4 ± GetMapping PLC 1999 WP/2012/0093/F - 46 Dowthorpe Hill, Earls Barton - 2 -

by an order of approximately 1.1 m. Also included in the scheme is the insertion of a dormer on the western roof slope and a first floor balcony on the property’s rear (southern) elevation. To accommodate the raising of the roof, the existing chimney would be removed, such that this would be the only property in a row of ten devoid of such a prominent roof line feature.

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY: WP/2003/0530 Single storey rear kitchen and internal alterations (NB. Partially retrospective) – approved with conditions WR/1964/0171 Housing estate – approved with conditions WR/1965/0271 Residential development - approved WR/1966/0242 Garages – approved.

NATIONAL AND LOCAL PLANNING POLICY: Regional Spatial Strategy 8 National Planning Policy Framework North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy: Policy 13 (General Sustainable Development Principles) Policy 14 (Energy efficiency and sustainable construction) Borough Council of Wellingborough Local Plan: Policy G4 (Development within the limited development and restricted infill villages) Supplementary Planning Guidance: II: Residential Extensions IV: Planning Out Crime Supplementary Planning Document: Sustainable Design Biodiversity

SUMMARY OF REPLIES TO CONSULTATIONS/REPRESENTATIONS RECEIVED: 1. Earls Barton Parish Council – no response received.

2. Borough Council of Wellingborough Design Officer – “as the property is part of a distinct/distinctive single-storey grouping in the street scene reflecting a clear underlying architectural concept, the raising of the roof structure to artificially create a first floor is incongruous and inappropriate, detrimentally affecting the character and appearance of the street”.

3. Neighbours – two representations from nos. 29 and 31 Dowthorpe Hill have been received. A summary of the issues raised by the writers are given below:

No. 31 Dowthorpe Hill wrote:- • Higher roof will affect my outlook • Could devalue my property

No. 29 Dowthorpe Hill wrote:-

“I would like to thank you and the council for the letter you sent giving me the chance to comment on the above planning proposals.

- 3 -

It absolutely takes my breath away, that you have the bare faced cheek to pretend to give a toss about local opinions, and their effect on a community of a proposed alteration to a building, considering your track record, like the drastic building alterations you allowed at no.31 Dowthorpe Hill.

Taking this into consideration, it can only lead me to believe in zero confidence of the "planning and building control" and what contradiction in terms that is. To not be able to tell the difference in a plan that dramatically alters a building to such an extent of not being in keeping with its surroundings plus will be out of line with other buildings of a the same nature and structure next or adjacent to it, let alone loss of view of which you definitely do not take into consideration. It really begs the question of such an organisation, are they fit for purpose?

Hiding behind a committee or council is fine; unfortunately it happens in all sorts of business. But what really gets to me is that it is paid for by the taxation of the community that I live in, of which you all draw you salary, pension, holiday pay, sick pay, committee tea break catering etc.

So why do you bother asking? Oh yes you have too! But, you will go ahead anyway because you know no better, and in the process disturb in more ways than one, the surrounding community. Take this process as an example; you notify all parties concerned, so you will upset neighbours who object, and will fall out of friendship in the process.

If you took a proper look at the surroundings, and did not hide behind "consultation notes" and reasons to back away from neighbourhoods falling out, plus looked at the peoples homes and their views from rooms etc, not "Core Spatial Strategy" or planning policies, in so far as not superseded by CSS …………….. now I mean what the heck is all that about????

Have you ever had to go the doctors to be given a diagnosis, let alone in their Latin names, and then walked out saying thanks, now what the hell was that all about? Oh and 21 days to find out or it is too late. You are informed by the doctor correctly in the language you understand and get help; in conclusion they change their language and assist you.

But I have no choice because you cannot and will not help to change your ways and will steam roller it through any how and sod the buildings in the area that have stood for 40+ years as bungalows and or 2 storey buildings.

I hope this is recycled properly, and does not end up on some tip in India, I've read about the councils' track record for recycling.

I do not expect a reply, because it will not change any of this now or in the future, and will only cost money from the communities' taxation, which we cannot afford.”

ASSESSMENT: The material planning considerations are considered to be: • Compliance with policy and SPG/SPD - 4 -

• Impact on Neighbour’s Amenities • Impact on the character and appearance of the area • Crime and disorder • Biodiversity and Other Considerations • Non material planning matters

Compliance with policy and SPG/SPD With regards to the Borough of Wellingborough Local Plan, Earls Barton is defined as a Limited Development village by Policy G4 and it states that development will be granted planning permission if it is within the policy line and if it would NOT have an adverse effect on the size, form character and setting of the village and its environs. Policy 13 (General Sustainable Development Principles) of the North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy (NNCSS) echoes the thrust of Policy G4 as it requires development should be of a high standard of design, respect and enhance the character of its surroundings.

The development proposal is within the village policy line and is opined to meet part (1) of Local Plan Policy G4. However, it is considered that the development proposal’s form would adversely affect its surrounding environs and, thereby, adversely affecting the character and appearance of the area.

It is therefore thought that this proposal is not in accordance with Policy 13 (h) of the North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy and Policy G4 (2) of the Local Plan.

Other more specific aspects of policy in relation to the current application are examined below.

Impact on the character and appearance of the area The North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy Policy 13 (h) says that new development should be of a high standard of design, architecture and landscaping, respect and enhance the character of its surroundings. Local Plan Policy G4 (2) also requires new development not to have an adverse impact on the size, form, character and setting of the village and its environs. The requirement for designs that contribute positively to their surroundings and which are also appropriate to their context is mentioned in paragraph 34 of PPS 1 and this concept is also reflected in the guidance contained in PPS 3.

As described earlier in this report, the development site is the penultimate single storey dwelling in a row of 10 similar single storey properties which share a clear and definitive building height line which progresses in a smooth and non-undulating form as one transcends from the first property in this row, up the gradual incline of the street, to the final property in this row which is positioned between the development site and the two storey dwelling to its west. The current street scene, of which this development site is apart, is of a distinctive single storey grouping reflecting a clear underlying architectural concept. The proposed raising of the roof by approximately 1.1 metres and the steepening of the roof pitch from 35 to 40 degrees is thought to create an incongruous and inappropriate feature in the localised prevailing street scene, thereby detrimentally affecting the character and appearance of the immediate area. The raised roof would introduce a pitch of roof slopes, a final ridge height, elevated eaves and a pronounced - 5 -

elongation of a principle gable ended elevation that are out of keeping with the style of properties on either side, with particular reference to the properties to the west.

The proposed dormer in the west facing roof slope would possibly be acceptable if it were an addition to the original roof, however, as it is part and parcel of the aforementioned incongruous roof extension, then it would further compound the visual impact of the development as a whole.

It is therefore concluded that the proposal would be contrary to Policy 13 (h) of the North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy and Policy G4 (2) of the Local Plan.

Impact on Neighbour’s Amenities Policy 13 (l) of the North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy states that new development should not result in an unacceptable impact on the amenities of neighbouring properties or the wider area by reason of loss of light or overlooking.

In order to ascertain whether any adverse impact is present with respect to the neighbouring properties, SPG II is used; with a line drawn from the middle of the nearest ground floor habitable room window of the neighbouring dwelling and if this line dissects the extension for any of its length the loss of light is considered to be unacceptable. The line is drawn at 45 degrees for a first storey extension. Whilst it was not possible to gain entry onto the neighbouring properties, estimations taken from the submitted application drawings and site observations, and it is thought that the 45 degree line would not intersect with the proposed extension. With this in mind, it is opined that the proposed extension would not have any discernable impact on the living conditions of the neighbouring residents in the properties known as nos. 44 and 48 Dowthorpe Hill.

Of concern, however, is the impact the proposed roof alterations and extensions would have upon the visual amenities of the neighbouring properties/wider area. Whilst it is not considered that their light or privacy would be harmed, it is thought that their general sense of place and consequently their levels of satisfaction derived from the built form upon which they may gaze would be harmed.

On balance, it is considered that the scheme would be contrary to Policy 13 (l) of the North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy.

Crime and disorder Policy 13 (b) of the North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy states that development should seek to design out antisocial behaviour, crime and reduce the fear of crime by applying the principles of the Secured By Design scheme. The above policy is predated by adopted Supplementary Planning Guidance ‘Planning Out Crime’ which gives detail to the intent of spatial strategy policy.

No pertinent crime and disorder issues have been identified within the scope of the application.

Biodiversity and Other Considerations The biodiversity remains unaffected and the principles of non-discrimination have been followed through-out. - 6 -

Non material planning matters The affect on property values and the disdainful comments lodged by the resident of No. 29 Dowthorpe Hill are noted, however, these are not material planning matters. The thrust of the opinions cited by the resident of no. 29 Dowthorpe Hill are thought to be aimed primarily at the perceived injustice of the planning decision reached for no. 31 Dowthorpe Hill and would appear to be a more general assault upon the planning system as a whole. It is not the purpose of this report to revisit the merits of an earlier decision on a site neighbouring this proposal, nor to defend the planning system in general. It may well have been better for the aggrieved party to have directed their comments to their local MP, whom on their behalf, could have raised the issues at Parliament for inclusion in the Coalition Government’s planning reform exercise.

Conclusion Refuse for the following reason:-

The proposed extension represents an unsatisfactory addition to the existing buiding and would, by reasons of its siting, design, layout and massing, detrimentally affect the character and appearance of the street scene, contrary to Policy 13 (h) of the North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy and Policy G4 (2) of the Borough Council of Wellingborough Local Plan.

RECOMMENDATION: Refuse.

1. The proposed extension represents an unsatisfactory addition to the existing buiding and would, by reasons of its siting, design, layout and massing, detrimentally affect the character and appearance of the street scene, contrary to Policy 13 (h) of the North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy and Policy G4 (2) of the Borough Council of Wellingborough Local Plan.

POLICY G4

IN THE LIMITED DEVELOPMENT AND RESTRICTED INFILL VILLAGES DEVELOPMENT WILL BE GRANTED PLANNING PERMISSION, SUBJECT TO MORE SPECIFIC POLICIES REGARDING INDIVIDUAL SITES AREAS OR USES, IF IT:

2. WILL NOT, EITHER INDIVIDUALLY OR CUMULATIVELY WITH OTHER PROPOSALS, HAVE AN ADVERSE IMPACT ON THE SIZE, FORM, CHARACTER AND SETTING OF THE VILLAGE AND ITS ENVIRONS.

LIMITED DEVELOPMENT VILLAGES ARE: EARLS BARTON; FINEDON AND WOLLASTON

RESTRICTED INFILL VILLAGES ARE: BOZEAT; ECTON; GREAT DODDINGTON; GREAT HARROWDEN; GRENDON; HARDWICK; IRCHESTER; ISHAM; LITTLE HARROWDEN; LITTLE - 7 -

IRCHESTER; MEARS ASHBY; ORLINGBURY; SYWELL EXCLUDING THE OLD VILLAGE; AND WILBY

Limited development and restricted infill villages are mutually distinguished in other policies below, notably H2 and H3 (housing)

Policy 13

Development should meet the needs of residents and businesses without compromising the ability of future generations to enjoy the same quality of life that the present generation aspires to. Development should:

Raise standards h) Be of a high standard of design, architecture and landscaping, respects and enhances the character of its surroundings and is in accordance with the Environmental Character of the area.

INFORMATIVE: The applicant is advised that this decision relates to the following drawing numbers received on the date shown: Drawing Number: Date Received: 3981/002 and 3981/003 20th February 2012

- 8 -

BOROUGH COUNCIL OF WELLINGBOROUGH

SITE VIEWING (Date of visit Tuesday 8th May 2012 at 10.15 a.m.)

Planning Committee 09/05/2012

Report of the Head of Planning and Development

APPLICATION REF: WP/2012/0134/FCOU

PROPOSAL: Change of use from retail unit to pizza takeaway and associated flue.

LOCATION: 10 High Street, Irchester, Wellingborough. NN29 7AB

APPLICANT: Mr A Ozdrogan.

This application comes before the Planning Committee for determination due to an objection being received by the Parish Council citing parking concerns. Members site visit requested by Irchester Parish Council.

PROPOSAL AND DESCRIPTION OF SITE: The application site is located in the Village of Irchester towards its centre and forms what would be considered the villages’ commercial core and forms a small row of terraced units comprising a Chinese take-away and a café either side of the subject premise which currently enjoys retail use. The property fronts the villages’ main through-road which links the village to Rushden and the A45.

The proposal is as above although essentially a blanket A5 (take-away) use is being applied for. The most recent/present use of the unit is retail (A1) and more specifically a sports outlet.

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY: BW/1986/0234 Change of use from butchers shop to licensed restaurant, wine bar and takeaway – refused WP/1992/0201 Change of use from shop to Indian Take-away – refused WP/2001/0712 Change of use from retail shop to restricted hours café – approved with conditions WP/2004/0153 Proposed change of use from shop to apartment – refused.

NATIONAL AND LOCAL PLANNING POLICY: North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy Policy 13 National Planning Policy Framework

SUMMARY OF REPLIES TO CONSULTATIONS/REPRESENTATIONS RECEIVED: 1. NCC (Highways) - “refer to standing advice”.

38 WP/2012/0134/FCOU

51 27 28

SCHOOL LANE 47

Village 38 Hall Health 41 Centre

34 Vicarage 12 13 35 15 39 HIGH STREET 19 1 6 11 37 5 13 Sharwood

27 Terrace 68.4m

33 35

25 SCHOOL ROAD 1

1 29a 2 18 9

CHAPEL HILL 27 8

25 22

White House Farm

2 18 21 5 ALEXANDER COURT

10 19 Church 6

46 13

69.8m 7

7 Rose Ct

10 34

17 to 1 New 5 1a

Street Ct

Club 8 3 1 to 58 1 to 3 6 1 9 11 A

NEW STREET

16 TCB 22

2 31 29 72.9m 14

76.7m 1

WANTAGE PL 1

1a 1b 7 3

War 2 1

9 2 Meml El Sub Sta 13 Craddock 9 Court

19 13 1 to 8 to 1 5

17 10

EAST STREET 12 14 2

14 74.0m 25

23 8

18 4 1

27 2 4

19 22 6 14 12a 11a 12

10 11 30

28 33 LONDON END

ORCHARD PLACE 32 27

74.5m 1

36 35

Planning & Local 11 Development © Crown Copyright and database right 2012. Scale: Ordnance Survey 100018694. Legend This map is accurate 1:1,250 Cities Revealed to the scale specified Aerial Photography copyright: when reproduced at A4 ± GetMapping PLC 1999 WP/2012/0134/FCOU - 10 High Street, Irchester - 9 -

2. Environmental Protection Department - “There are flats in the adjoining properties and other residential properties in close proximity.

I am concerned that the extract flue height as shown may not provide sufficient dispersion of cooking fumes. Details of the system to mitigate cooking odours should be submitted and the discharge height for cooking fumes should be at least above the ridge of the main roof of the building.”

3. Police - “Northamptonshire Police has no formal objection to the change of use as proposed if submitted for planning approval in its present form without change unless any subsequent or proposed changes have been discussed and agreed beforehand.”

4. Parish Council - “the parish council have raised concerns as to the limited parking available outside the premises.”

5. Third Party Objections -

1a New Street

“I am currently living next door to this site and this application has brought up a number of things for me. It worries me that a small village like irchester already has more than enough take-aways, the chip shop already does pizza and you can order it from rushden or wellingborough and they will deliver. Does a village as small need a take-away? we have one shop that sells fruit and veg...the other has just been turned into Bargin Booze! The parking is my next issue, irchester is a short cut to most people and traffic is steady/heavy throughout the day. We live on a very small dead end, we already have problems getting up and down the road due to lorrys delivering, resident parking and people coming to shop at the co-op, picking up take-aways or going round the village in general. The parking goes onto the high street, farndish road etc and it is a real problem from 3-7/8pm as traffic can't pass easily through high street as vehicles are parked outside 7, 10 and 12 high street, causing vehicles to pass in one lane. It would be nice to see the shop used as a shop...giving other business's a chance. On a selfish point, I don't want to look out of my window onto a pizza take out, see a massive flue, or even hear one. I struggle with my baby sometimes with the noise from the current business's (his room is next to 12 and faces 10). In the summer it is going to be a nightmare during the evening if we can't open our windows for the sound of three take-aways prepping and serving food next to us all day and evening. What would happen in future if i want to sell my house?? I probably won't. I'm sure potential viewers would like to walk down the drive and see industrial flues, cookers and staff. I just find it a shame that the Government is putting all this money into getting families, especially children fit and to eat healthy and if you stand in the middle of the village you see potentially 5 take- aways. Not a good sign we are giving to our children. Im objecting this due to the noise, increase in traffic/parking, my views from my windows will be ruined (especially my kitchen and lounge as it is right in front of it!). If people want Pizzas, either make one or order it from Rushden, there are numberous pizza places there that deliver. Im not attacking the applicant at all, but perhaps a different use for the building would be better for our village.” - 10 -

“I feel that there is enough food in the area and we can do without another takeaway offering. I live at the rear of the shop and would not want the noise to be increased due to the use changing from an A1 to an A3? I'm sure it could work as a retail unit if the owner actually opened for more than 1 day a month?”

87 Bradshaw Way

“We already have a chinese and Indian take away plus a sandwich/cake shop. I think this village will be spoiled. My daughter moved here to get away from the "town" environment and hassle and I feel the lovely Old Village high street is fast turning into a fast food retail street”

6. Letter of support from a neighbouring business -

“We are the owners of the property connected to 8 High Street.

8 High Street is at present an absolute eyesore which reflects badly upon our shop. We have seen the pizza establishments that Mr Ozdrogan has previously renovated and opened. One in Earls Barton and one in Rushden.

His premises are always clean and professional. He does not stand for any nonsense from youth loitering or dropping litter in the surrounding area.

We therefore are in favour of the plans and hope he gains permission to lift the standard of the shop in such a prominent position in the High Street.”

7. Letter from operator of shop –

“I hereby confirm that the shop at 10 high street Irchester was a cricket specialist shop. which means its was running only 5 months of the year.

i am had been struggling with the business for several years, been a single mum with 4 kids, i husband i have beeen divorced and my father passed away who was helping me, the business was not supporting us. So i have been working full time. i have tried to rent the shop but had no luck until now. The shop has a 13 years lease on it. which may have been the problem.

i hope this explain my circumstances of how important it is for me to have this shop rented out.”

8. 23 name petition received – in support of application.

ASSESSMENT: NOTE: The agent/applicant was asked to provide details as to whether or not the property has been marketed with regards its existing use and if so provide evidence; it appears that no marketing exercise has been performed with no evidence forthcoming.

- 11 -

The key issues with regard this application is firstly the impact on neighbours either by way of noise or unwelcome odours and secondly the principle of the loss of the retail use.

Principle of the development The existing use of the premise is retail with the previous permission (WP/2001/0712) for a restricted hour’s café having expired 27th February 2007 or if ever enacted has reverted back to retail under permitted development with the A3 café permission therefore lost. The most recent/present use under the retail umbrella is as a sports outlet. The village contains a number of retail premises including the reasonably sized co-op convenience store which is in close proximity to the site as well as 3 take-away outlets and also a small café two of which bookend the proposal unit. The retail presence in the village considering its size is not considered to be great therefore any loss of the existing retail stock should be considered carefully.

The coalition government in the recently published framework document emphasises the importance in promoting a strong rural economy which amongst other things is achieved by promoting the retention of local services in villages, with village shops used as a prime example of such a service. It is considered that as the village does not possess a good number of retail uses and as the size of the unit could be reasonably used as a complimentary retail use to the existing the loss of the retail use should be resisted and that any loss would compromise the sustainability and to a degree the vitality of the village as a whole and at this location. In addition whilst the specified use as a pizza takeaway may differ from the other types of village takeaway (Indian, Fish & Chips and Chinese) the use permitted would be for A5 which would not distinguish between the types of cuisine sold. The number of existing take-away facilities together with the possible delivery option as pointed out by an objector is considered sufficient and offers enough variety to meet the needs of the village.

Policy 13 (f) of the North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy stipulates that development should “Not lead to the loss of community facilities, unless it can be demonstrated that they are no longer needed by the community”. The application has not provided any evidence that a marketing exercise has taken place with its existing retail use or any documentation that would support the loss of the retail use. It is noted that the current operator opens only occasionally and offers little in the way of a facility to locals it is suggested that a different type of retail use may create a real village asset and one that would add vibrancy and vitality and in any event should at least be explored by a marketing exercise before permitting a change.

It is therefore considered that the change of use would represent harm to the village with the loss of the community facility that could aid in the ability of the settlement to be sustainable and would be detrimental to the vitality of the village core.

Impact on neighbour’s amenities As detailed in the comments received from the Council’s Environmental Protection Manager there are residential properties in close proximity to the unit; the height of the flue is not considered to demonstrate that there will be no harm by way of odours towards neighbours. The most affected neighbours in question would most likely be 1a New Street and also some of the flats to the North of the site in Rose Court with a row of velux windows facing towards the rear elevation of the commercial row. Any - 12 - potential for noise pollution would be controlled in part by limiting the opening hours and if the problems should be significant there exists environmental protection legislation to control the noise. There is not likely to be any increase in overlooking towards neighbours.

Highway Implications It is accepted that this particular location within the village does receive congestion at times mostly as a result of parked vehicles on High Street unfortunately without any concerns being raised by the Highways Authority any refusal on highway grounds is not sustainable.

Other Considerations The biodiversity is unaffected and the development does not result in an increased potential for crime and the principles of non-discrimination have been followed throughout.

Conclusion In light of the above the proposed change of use is considered to result in the loss of a valuable village facility and harmful to the vitality and vibrancy of the village at this location with no justification offered to support the loss of the retail use. In addition the application as submitted has failed, by virtue of the flue height, to demonstrate that there would be no detrimental impact by way of odours towards surrounding neighbours. The application is considered to be in conflict with NNCSS Policy 13 parts f and l therein and inconsistent with NPPF para. 28.

RECOMMENDATION: Refuse.

1. Due to the location of the development site the proposed change of use is considered to result in the loss of a valuable village facility and harmful to the vitality and vibrancy of the village at this location with no justification offered to support the loss of the retail use. The application is considered to be in conflict with North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy Policy 13 (f) and inconsistent with National Planning Policy Framework para. 28. 2. Due to the height of the flue and its proximity and orientation to neighbours the development as submitted has failed to demonstrate that there would be no detrimental impact by way of odours towards surrounding neighbours in particular to 1a New Street. The application is considered to be in conflict with North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy Policy 13 (l) and inconsistent with National Planning Policy Framework para. 17 (4).

Policy 13

- 13 -

Meet needs f) Not lead to the loss of community facilities, unless it can be demonstrated that they are no longer needed by the community they serve and are not needed for any other community use to that the facility is being relocated and improved to meet the needs of the new and existing community; and

Protect assets l) Not result in an unacceptable impact on the amenities of neighbouring properties or the wider area, by reason of noise, vibration, smell, light or other pollution, loss of light or overlooking.

INFORMATIVE: The applicant is advised that this decision relates to the following drawing numbers received on the date shown: Drawing Number: Date Received: 18-12-01 & 02 13 March 2012 - 14 -

BOROUGH COUNCIL OF WELLINGBOROUGH

Planning Committee 09/05/2012

Report of the Head of Planning and Development

APPLICATION REF: WP/2011/0280/FM

PROPOSAL: Re-development of the site to construct a community medical centre with pharmacy retail unit, parking and servicing provision and landscaping - Amended plans to show changes to design and footprint of the building and amended transport assessment.

LOCATION: Eagle Public House, 12 14 Olympic Way, Wellingborough, NN8 3QE

APPLICANT: Dr Andrew Wainwright, Queensway Medical Practice.

Major development.

PROPOSAL AND DESCRIPTION OF SITE: The application site (0.36 hectare) occupies a prominent location at the junction of Olympic Way and Queensway, approximately 250 metres from the current Queensway Medical Centre. It is bounded to the north by a small parade of shops with shared access from Olympic Way. To the east of the site and straddling Queensway is pedestrian footbridge linking the site and adjacent shops with the adjacent housing estate.

Consent is sought to redevelop the site to provide a contemporary medical facility. The proposal is for a two storey building to provide a focal point for the local community. The proposed building will accommodate facilities transferred from the existing medical centre with the ground floor principally be used to accommodate patient facilities, with staff and administration accommodation at first floor level.

The proposal utilises the existing vehicular access on Olympic Way, leading to 39 car parking spaces and an ambulance drop-off area. The development also includes provision for a new covered cycle parking shelter for staff and visitors. The new facility will have approximately 23 full-time staff in the first year of operation, many of whom will transfer to the building from the existing medical centre. This figure will rise to 35 over a decade dependent on the projected increase in patients.

The proposal is a replacement for an existing facility nearby. The current Queensway Medical Centre was built around the 1950-60s and is situated on Olympic Way (not too far from the application site). The existing facility was intended to accommodate the

2 5 WP/2011/0280/FM

Langdale Court

3 1

6 8 WINDERMERE DRIVE

2 10 El Sub Sta

20 1

1 3

26 BUTTERMERE 16

11 16

25 15

BOWNESS

15 1 to 44 to 1

Bilton Court

24 19

Ward Bdy

18 96.4m

Queensway 51

Medical Centre 27

35 QUEENSWAY 33 Kingdom Hall of Jehovah's Witnesses El Sub Sta 2 A

95.6m

36 22 29 Foot

Bridge 79 The Eagle (PH) 5 10

26 33

19 16 23 30

25 7 96.4m

1 28 63 19 34

25 24 30 31 36 34 12

6 Sylvanus 18

House

53 17

10 4 16

7 1

29 27

1 KILNWAY 49

7 6 68

95.5m

55 64

LB 56

310 Path 282 KILNWAY Planning & Local Development © Crown Copyright and database right 2012. Legend Scale: Ordnance Survey 100018694. This map is accurate 1:1,250 Cities Revealed to the scale specified Aerial Photography copyright: when reproduced at A4 WP/2011/0280/FM - Eagle PH, 12-14 Olympic Way, Wellingborough ± GetMapping PLC 1999 - 15 -

medical practice for approximately 15 years. However, this lifespan has extended to the 21st century. The practice has a catchment area that incorporates Wellingborough and the population within a 5 mile radius of the existing medical centre. The existing facility comprises medical accommodation as follows:

• seven consulting suites • a fully equipped treatment room • facilities for minor surgical operations • a large clinic room for health visitor services

An expanding local population has highlighted the need to upgrade and improve facilities at this medical centre. The existing building and site cannot accommodate these requirements, dictating the requirement for a more suitable site within the local area. The proposal is consistent with the long standing strategic ambitions of the NHS to ensure appropriate fit-for-purpose facilities are developed for the Queensway Medical Practice. Both NHS Northamptonshire’s Vision and Strategic Plan demonstrate an ambition to radically improve health and social care services in the county and sets the national vision within a local context. Underpinning the strategic plan are principles of quality, a commitment to commission safe, clinically effective care in clean and suitable environments, and to promote health and well-being for the population of Northamptonshire.

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY: Purpose built public house with a history of consent for various signage

NATIONAL AND LOCAL PLANNING POLICY: National Planning Policy Framework

North Northamptonshire Core Strategy Policy 1 – Strengthening the Network of Settlements Policy 6 – Infrastructure Delivery and Developer Contributions Policy 9 – Distribution and Location of Development Policy 13 – General Sustainable Development Principles Policy 14 – Energy Efficiency and Sustainable Construction

Wellingborough Local Plan Policy L2 – New Community Facilities

SUMMARY OF REPLIES TO CONSULTATIONS/REPRESENTATIONS RECEIVED: 1. NCC Highways – no objection. Previous concerns relating to the content of the Framework Travel Plan and the Transport Assessment have now been addressed in the amended documents.

2. Environment Agency – no observations.

3. NCC Archaeology – condition to safeguard archaeological interest.

4. Northamptonshire Police - Northamptonshire Police has no formal objection to the planning application in its present form other than to suggest that the following informatives/conditions are included, which if implemented will reduce - 16 -

the likelihood of crime, disorder and anti-social behaviour occurring. This is in the interest of the security and quality life of future occupants of the development in accordance with Policy 13 of the North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy.

5. BCW Trees Officer – “there is a lack of detail regarding the existing trees on the site. There is not even a graphic distinction between what is existing and what is proposed. Existing trees are indicated around the proposed car park which would appear to be unaltered with the proposed scheme. The loss of the larger of the two sycamore trees adjacent to the footbridge to make way for the sewer is regrettable. The two small specimens lower down the bank less so. I cannot see a red line indicating the site boundary. The location of the highway boundary needs to be defined. Details of the proposed panting will be required. It will be in effect barrier planting around the building. Some temporary low fence may be required to allow it to establish.”

6. The occupier of no. 11 Olympic Way – “as the owner of 11, Olympic Way, Wellingborough, I would like to raise a couple of concerns over the proposed development on application WP/2011/0280. Firstly a statement of fact about the reduction on car parking spaces in the car park from the pub days reducing traffic, is an interesting statement to say the least, in the 15 plus years my partner and 10 or so years I have lived opposite the pub, the car park generally has had 3-5 cars parked there associated to the pub. The pub was a community pub, used mainly by locals, most of whom did not have cars, or need to drive, as it was situated within close walking distance of their home address. The only time the car park was/is full is when there is a Jehovah’s meeting at Kingdom Hall.

This brings me on to my second concern, which is that, the restriction on parking in the car park too surgery hours, with inadvertently result in a server on street parking problem during weekday evening meetings and Sunday services of the Jehovah’s witnesses. We already have a parking problem along the Queensway end of Olympic way due to the fact that most houses have 1 or 2 cars and only 2 houses have driveways.

It should also be noted that the area of roadway, is certainly not well lit since the turning off of 50% of the street lamps. My third concern is that no report or consideration has been made to the introduction of RF noise, as a member of RAYNET and the RSGB, this causes me great concern. Currently I have a very low noise level at 11, Olympic Way, and as such I am able to run a number of radio based services for RAYNET, which can be called upon 24 hours a day by RAYNET, for the Emergency Planning Officer at Northampton. My final concern is the loss of 2 footpaths across the site, the first is a public right of way that runs from the road crossing to the shops directly in front of the pub, this is currently very heavily used, and there appear to be no plans to move it or reinstate it after the works. The second footpath is a gifted path (that has been used for at least 15 years) that runs to the rear of the pub between the pub and the car park. Again this foot path is quite heavily used by locals to reach the shops. With the closure of these two footpath, I believe that a number of the more elderly residents with struggle to get to the Coop.” - 17 -

7. Queensway Medical Centre Patient Participation Group –

“The Patient Participation Group of Queensway Medical Centre met yesterday and, having heard the latest news of this proposed development, resolved to write to you and express the hope that, following due process, the plans would meet with the Committee's approval at its meeting on 9 May 2012. The PPG trusts that all the Councillors in the Borough are fully aware of the importance of the new buildings, as this Medical Centre, which serves the medical and social welfare needs of so many local residents, grows and further develops, adequately housed and equipped to meet the needs of a twenty-first century community and training practice. The PPG particularly urges the Council to realise how significant the proposed development is, given that funding has been secured, in this time of acute financial stringency.

We have taken the liberty of sending copies of this letter to those Councillors whose wards are most closely served by QMC, and also to the Principal Planning Officer, whose staff have been so supportive in the planning process.”

ASSESSMENT: Principle The Core Spatial Strategy supports new community facilities/infrastructure provision to support the growth in population. The authorised use of the site is as a drinking establishment. Public houses often serve a useful community/recreational purpose, but the loss in this instance should not be resisted as the replacement development offers comparable community benefits. In the circumstances, the proposal complies with the relevant development plan polices that seek to safeguard existing community facilities. CSS Policy 13 states that loss of facilities can be tolerated if it can be demonstrated that the facility is no longer needed for community use or that the facility is being relocated and improved to meet the needs of the new and existing community. The public house has been vacant for a considerable period of time and is understood to have been actively marketed without success. Local Plan Policy L2 states that proposals for small-scale community facilities will be considered favourably if they are well designed to meet the needs of the local residents. The proposed development meets this requirement.

Layout, Design, Character and Appearance The layout of the development has been formulated in response to the site’s opportunities and constraints and the requirement to provide a building layout that will provide simple orientation, efficiency, and the future flexibility required. The layout is a consequence of the following:

• The changing nature of healthcare requirements informs necessity to design in flexibility - the plan arrangement responds to this through a clear planning grid which creates regular room sizes. Therefore consulting, treatment, and nurse practitioner rooms can be inter-changeable with minimal mechanical and electrical adaptation required; the requirement for all clinical and patient areas to be located on the ground floor has dictated the footprint of the building - other influences apart from functional and spatial relationships include the requirement to provide natural day light into the majority of spaces; the building scale and massing have also been developed in response to the schedule of accommodation required to create an efficient layout and - 18 -

the surrounding site context of 2 and 3 storey buildings. The scale and massing reflect the following design ideas and consideration. It was established at an early stage that the accommodation would require a 2 storey building with a significantly larger ground floor than first floor. The positioning of the first floor element is towards the Queensway elevation to afford the building increased prominence on the main approaches to the building - both directions along Queensway. To reflect the underlying scale and massing concept the materials and appearance have been developed accordingly with a simple palette of materials to define and reflect the design philosophy of each building element.

In the light of the foregoing, it is considered that the development would create a landmark building at this prominent location and would enhance the appearance of the street scene and the surrounding area as a whole.

Landscaping As part of the underlying design concept, the treatment of the external hard and soft landscaped areas have been carefully developed with the building design to ensure the use of the spaces compliments and extends the function of the building. The soft landscape strip, that continues along both sides of Queensway, is retained and new spiky low-level shrubs are to be planted to the perimeter of the building facing Queensway. These provide a degree of privacy to the ground floor consulting rooms and prevent pedestrian access to this aspect of the building. An enclosed landscaped courtyard adjacent to the main seating area will provide a break out space for the building and allows inward-looking clinical accommodation - maximising floor plan efficiency and improving user well-being.

The enclosed external courtyard is provided between the building and its car park, enforcing privacy and security to the Nursing Suite accommodation. Both the entrance route and the external courtyard materials have been selected to match the internal ground floor finishes of the building and external cladding to ensure that internal and external spaces naturally flow into each other. Edging details to hard landscaped areas will also have materials that reflect those of the main building elevations. To further enhance the natural habitat of the development site, native wild flower beds will be introduced to areas to the north of building and areas within the car park. A detailed planting schedule will be provided as part of the post-planning application process. There will also be new trees defining the main pedestrian entrance route to the building, as indicated on the site plans - these will offset the trees that will need to be removed to make way for the new car park.

Amenity Impact Having regard to the siting of the proposed building, its scale and massing relative to the neighbouring properties in Olympic, it is not considered that there would be any significant impact on the living conditions of the neighbours in terms of daylight/sunlight impact, overlooking and privacy.

Traffic and Parking Issues The Highway Engineers have not raised any objections to the proposed development in relation to traffic impact and parking provision. The proposal utilises the existing access on Olympic Way (no alterations proposed) shared with the neighbouring developments – including the adjacent shops. Provision is made for 39 car parking spaces and an - 19 -

ambulance drop-off point within the site boundaries. These provisions are sufficient for a proposal in this location, essentially providing a local facility where a significant proportion of patrons is expected to access by foot. A neighbouring occupier has raised issues concerning the public right of way passing through the site. As part of the proposal, a new diverted footpath is proposed near the site boundary with Queensway. Although no objection is raised from the County Council, the closure of the existing footpath would be subject to the approval of the County Council as required under a separate legislation.

Conclusion The proposed development provides a replacement community facility and is supported by the relevant development plan policies. The layout and design of the building are acceptable and there is minimal amenity impact. Access arrangement and parking provision are acceptable and in the circumstances, there are no reasons why consent should be withheld.

RECOMMENDATION: Grant permission subject to the following conditions.

1. The development shall be begun not later than the expiration of three years beginning with the date of this permission. 2. Notwithstanding any materials specified on the application form and/or the drawings, particulars and samples of the materials to be used on all external surfaces of the buildings, including fenestration, windows, doors, eaves and verges shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority before the commencement of the development. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details. 3. Details of soft landscaping and the boundary treatments including gates, fence and other means of enclosure shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority before the commencement of the development. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details. 4. The approved development shall be used as a medical facility falling within Class D1 of the Town and Country Planning (Use Classes) Order and for no other purpose (including any other purpose in Class D1 of the Order or any statutory instrument revoking or re-enacting the Order with or without modification. 5. Prior to the commencement of development, a scheme detailing the security standards to be incorporated within all openings associated with the development shall have been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority in consultation with the Police CPDA and in line with the recommendations of Secured by Design. 6. Prior to occupation of the development the applicants shall supply proof of security standards by way of certification. 7. No development shall take place on the application site until the applicant, or their agents or successors in title, has secured the implementation of a programme of archaeological work in accordance with a written scheme of investigation which has been submitted to the local planning authority for approval in writing.

- 20 -

Reasons: 1. Required to be imposed pursuant to S51 of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004. 2. To ensure that the appearance of the development is satisfactory in the interest of visual amenity. 3. To enhance the visual amenity of the area. 4. In order to properly assess the other uses within the Use Class and to protect neighbouring amenities by ensuring that other uses which could result in a loss of amenity do not occur without the approval of the local planning authority. 5. This is in the interest of the security and quality life of future occupants of the development in accordance with Policy 13 of the North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy. 6. This is in the interest of the security and quality life of future occupants of the development in accordance with Policy 13 of the North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy. 7. To ensure proper safeguard, examination and recording of legitimate archaeological interests on the site.

INFORMATIVE/S 1. Pursuant to Section 38 (6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004, the proposed development complies with the applicable development plan policies and there are no other material considerations that would constitute sustainable grounds for refusal. These include specifically the following policies: North Northamptonshire Core Strategy Policy 1 - Strengthening the Network of Settlements Policy 6 - Infrastructure Delivery and Developer Contributions Policy 9 - Distribution and Location of Development Policy 13 - General Sustainable Development Principles Policy 14 - Energy Efficiency and Sustainable Construction Wellingborough Local Plan Policy L2 - New Community Facilities. 2. The applicant is advised that this decision relates to the following drawing numbers received on the dates shown: Drawing Numbers: Dates Received: 2021(08) 01G, 02E, 03C, 04E, 05C, 06F, 07D, 08A, 09, 11A, 12A, 14A, 16A, 17B, & 18 20/01/2012 & 21/02/2012. 3. The applicant/developer's is drawn to the following advice of the Northamptonshire Police. Building Security: If the security is not robust enough from the outset, unsightly retro-fit security measure will have to be added. These can be costly and will compromise the integrity of the building. • External doors should comply with the Loss Prevention Certification Board (LPCB) security standard LPS1175 SR 2 or 3 (or equivalent rating) as a minimum. This includes Louver door sets and Emergency exit doors. The D&AS does state that this will be adhered to. • The Drug Storage area should have high level of security. • A warning facility or alarm for external doors should be fitted so that a signal on opening can be transmitted to a security or general office. - 21 -

These doors should also be signed to warn visitors of the alarm alert. • Emergency escape doors and frames should be manufactured from steel and designed without visible external ironmongery. Fire doors should be fitted with door contacts linked to a 24-hour audible alarm activated on opening and/or relayed to security and signed to prevent inadvertent or false signals. These doors should also comply with the above. • All ground floor and other accessible or vulnerable windows must be independently certificated to BS7950 (Windows of Enhanced Security), or the LPCB security standard LPS1175 SR 2 or 3. These same windows must also use laminated glazing of at least 10.8mm in thickness. • The building should have an intruder alarm system installed in compliance with Association of Chief Police Officers (ACPO) Security Alarm Policy. This ensures that the technical aspects of the alarm specification will result in a police response to a confirmed activation on site. I would also suggest an internal alarm that can be zoned. This will allow areas that are not being used to be shut down and protected. While allowing other areas to be used. • Personal attack alarm should be linked into the police response system, this is particularly important for the Pharmacy staff. • The Pharmacy entrance doors should allow access control in the evening so that staff can control the flow of customers. If this is not possible I would suggest a secure serving hatch that would allow a safe transaction. • Staff areas should have access control either with self closing key operated doors or with a fob system. • Cycle racks should be designed to allow users to lock both wheels and the cross bar. Boundary Treatment: This should be designed to prevent access but should also discourage graffiti, criminal damage, and anti social behaviour. It should not allow people to walk along or sit on. It should also allow surveillance in to the site. The site should not be accessible out of hours. During the build: Please be aware that Crime on building sites is a national issue. These include theft of plant, tools, work vans (these are often left un-locked with the keys in) as well as building materials and heating systems (including solar panels). - 22 -

BOROUGH COUNCIL OF WELLINGBOROUGH

Planning Committee 09/05/2012

Report of the Head of Planning and Development

APPLICATION REF: WP/2011/0556/FM

PROPOSAL: Demolition of existing public house building to be replaced by 60 no. bedroom residential care home. Additional plans in respect of the other elevations. Further additional plans showing north west Northampton Road elevation and site plan - Changes to design and scale of the building.

LOCATION: Duke of York, 159 Northampton Road, Wellingborough. NN8 3PN

APPLICANT: Brampton Valley Wellingborough Limited.

NOTE: The Committee considered this application last month and resolved to defer it - so that further consideration be given to the design and scale of the building in relation to its impact on the amenities of the neighbouring residential properties. Accordingly, the scheme has been amended and the content of the agent's letter accompanying the revised plans is reproduced below. This sets out the underlying rationale for the revised plans.

In the light of the changes proposed, the plan numbers now differ from those contained in the original report. Therefore, if the Committee is minded to resolve to approve the proposal, the relevant informative in the original report should be amended to reflect the changes to the plan numbers as follows:

W4801-AL(9) 001D, 002D, 003D, 004A, 043A, 044A, 045B, 900B, 905, 906, 907, 908 and 909

Further to our conversation we have re-developed the proposals for the proposed care home at the Duke of York site on Northampton Road.

Following the last committee meeting members requested that the architect:-

· Re-evaluated the proposals so that potential overlooking from the first floor windows of the lounge window of 155 Northampton road could be avoided · Amend the proposals so that the proposed bedroom to the North East corner would have no impact onto 157 Northampton Road. WP/2011/0556/FM

72.5m 37

150

48 119

123 51 CR ED & Ward Bdy 12 162 72.5m

10 NORTHAMPTON ROAD

174

135 2 143

186 1

LB 157 A The Duke of York PO (PH) 71.6m 198 196

Our Lady's Catholic Infant School TCB

200

KINGSWAY Church of St Edmund Campion

School House 10

Shelter

8 25

21 1 1

NORMAN WAY

KINGSWAY

3 7

WILBYE

GRANGE

6 9

Planning & Local Development © Crown Copyright and database right 2012. Scale: Ordnance Survey 100018694. Legend This map is accurate 1:1,250 Cities Revealed to the scale specified Aerial Photography copyright: when reproduced at A4 WP/2011/0556/FM - Duke of York, 159 Northampton Road, Wellingborough ± GetMapping PLC 1999 - 23 -

As with all designs small changes normally have a large impact and as such we have redesigned the home to ensure that members requests are answered. We have also provided additional clarification drawings showing distances, levels and impact to assure members that the proposals have minimal impact upon the existing dwellings.

Looking at the two points to be resolved in turn;

Prevention of overlooking from First Floor windows into existing Lounge to 155 Northampton Road Drawing W4801 AL(9)908 Photo 1 shows the extension to 155 Northampton Road and the side window of approx 1135x 1210h which overlooks the garden of 157 Northampton Road. This is from planning approval no WP/2006/0295. We understand that it is this window that members have concerns about overlooking from the proposed care home development.

Within the proposals if we take the bedrooms within the main wing running North West to South East - We have removed a bedroom which was perpendicular to the lounge window of 155 Northampton Road and replaced this with an Assisted Shower, to this room we have removed the window completely.

To the next 5 bedroom windows we have introduced a splayed window of 35deg which also has included an extended integral privacy screen which runs past the outer edge of the window by 350mm. We have re-arranged all these bedrooms so that residents can only view down the garden from the bed head. This has been clearly shown on drawing W4801 AL(9)909. You will see from this drawing that viewing lines from these bedrooms to the site boundary is some 21-22 metres.

We have not introduced a splayed window to Bedroom 47, 48 and 49 as these are some 34 metres away from the lounge window at 155 Northampton road and is viewed at an angle of nearly 45 degrees which is way in advance of any design standards.

In undertaking this design change we have also had to redesign the drainage and air extraction systems throughout the building and as such all the bedrooms to this wing on all floors have had to be redesigned.

Drawing W4801 AL(0)044A shows the North East elevation of the proposed home from within the site, from 157 and 155. This drawing clearly shows that the proposed ground floor is well screened by the existing fence line and so no additional window treatment is required to windows on this level. This drawing also clearly illustrates how the building is to be sunken into the site so that from all surrounding aspects the home will have an appearance of a two story building, Drawing W4801 AL(9)906, 97 and 908 show sections through the site in relation to the garden areas of 155 and 157 Northampton Road. These drawings also show the relationship between the proposed car home and the previous planning application and the existing Public House.

- 24 -

Bedroom to North East Corner After consulting with our client and due to the low amount of bedrooms on this scheme we have retained a bedroom here, however we have redesigned this so that it’s height and footprint are similar to the existing garage currently on site (As can be seen on drawing W4801 AL(9)908 Photo 2 and 3 – Footprint highlighted in red on drawing W4801 AL(9)905). We have indeed moved the proposals away from the neighbouring property by 1400mm from the boundary which the existing garage occupies so as to introduce a maintenance passageway through to the rear area. The bedroom area has a flat roof to reflect the existing garage and can be seen on elevation drawing W4801 AL(0)045; keeping the rhythm of the street as requested by the local council.

We believe that we have now answered all the queries as expressed by members at the last committee meeting.

As discussed we are currently arranging a meeting with the neighbours to discuss these alterations and would like to invite members to this meeting especially Councillor Bell – Could you please forward his details through so that we can arrange a suitable time for his inclusion within the meeting.

E-mail received from – 153 Northampton Road, Wellingborough.

“Hi, i am emailing you with regards to planning for 159 Northampton road. Wellingborough. I have tried to look at the amended form on line but there seems to be a problem as i cannot get to view the plans, we have no problem with the application but our only concerns are that if there are any floors that raise above our fence line that our privacy will be invaded, if they have any windows fitted facing towards our gardens this will invade, if the building is to be a certain height, how high is it going to be built above the the rise of our houses as we also do not want a lot of natural light to be blocked out by the building itself.

I look forward to your reply.”

E-mail received from 3 Norman Way, Wellingborough –

“I have checked the revised drawings and have no comments to make. Further to my last comments, I can see no allowance for cycle sheds, shower and changing lockers as stated in the Travel Plan (wish list).”

E-mail received from 157 Northampton Road, Wellingborough -

“This would be a good time to look back at this planning request in order that we can look forward with clarity.

The developers, Winvic, have purchased a piece of land, The Duke of York Public House, which is too small for the proposed development. The reason it is too small can be found in Policy 13 of the local planning law. The developers have found it impossible to create a plan that meets their stated profit expectations and complies with Policy 13. - 25 -

The initial plan was rejected by the council planning committee because it was too large for the plot, too obtrusive and large for the adjoining properties, overlooked the gardens and homes of the immediate neighbours, created shade and destroyed the amenity of the neighbouring gardens. This decision was upheld by the Government inspector.

A normal route for a developer in these circumstances would be to negotiate with the neighbours right up to purchasing adjoining properties and therefore purchasing their objections. This route has been available to the deveolpers for some time but they have chosen not to take it.

A more distasteful route would be to bully malleable members of the planning committee in to ignoring local planning policies and pushing through a plan that breaks them. A minority of planning committee councillors appear willing to ignore the planning process.

It is clear that Cllr Waters has tired of the planning process and wishes to suspend parts of policy 13 which will assist Winvic to maximise their stated profit expectations. He clearly said that he would ignore the overlooking and massing issues enshrined in policy 13.

I ask the remaining Councillors to remember why they stood to represent local people. I ask them to look again at the decision of the Government inspector and remember that local people have only applied planning policies to their objections. It has been planning policies that have prevailed and in a civilised society that is how it should be.

I'm asking the remaining majority of Councillors on the planning committee to continue applying planning policies to this application. Do nothing for me personally, do nothing for the applicant personally. Just apply the local planning policies fairly, thank you.”

- 26 -

2 N D R E P O R T

BOROUGH COUNCIL OF WELLINGBOROUGH

SITE VIEWING (Date of visit Tuesday 3rd April 2012 at 10.00 a.m.)

Planning Committee 04/04/2012

Report of the Head Planning and Development

APPLICATION REF: WP/2011/0556/FM

LOCATION: Duke of York, 159 Northampton Road, Wellingborough.

APPLICANT: Brampton Valley Wellingborough Limited.

NOTE: Deferred at Planning Committee on 7th March 2012 for site viewing group to visit site. - 27 -

O R I G I N A L R E P O R T

BOROUGH COUNCIL OF WELLINGBOROUGH AGENDA ITEM

Planning Committee 07/03/2012

Report of the Head Planning and Development

APPLICATION REF: WP/2011/0556/FM

LOCATION: Duke of York, 159 Northampton Road, Wellingborough.

APPLICANT: Brampton Valley Wellingborough Limited.

Major development.

BACKGROUND In July 2010, the Committee considered and resolved to refuse consent for a proposal on this site for a 78-bed residential care home by demolishing the existing public house building. The reasons for refusal were:

The proposed development by reasons of its scale and site coverage, presents an overdevelopment of the site, not in keeping with the character and appearance of the surrounding area and by reason of its siting would give rise to conditions prejudicial to the living conditions of the neighbouring occupiers in relation to overlooking and disturbance from vehicular movement. The proposal is therefore contrary to Policy 13 of the North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy;

The proposed car parking provision is insufficient and in the absence of a proper assessment of the site which provides a parking accumulation exercise to ensure that an adequate level of parking is provided and that no overspill onto vulnerable local roads occurs, and in the absence of a proper assessment to ascertain the cumulative impact of the individual site accesses, the proposed development would have an adverse impact on the local highway network, contrary to Policy 13 of the North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy.

The applicant subsequently lodged an appeal with the Secretary of State and an informal hearing was held in January 2011. In dismissing the appeal, the appointed Inspector identified three main issues: the character and appearance of the proposal; - 28 - the impact of the proposed scheme on the living conditions and amenity of the adjoining neighbours; and the level of parking provision and impact of the traffic generation from the proposed care home on the highway safety.

The Inspector concluded that the contemporary design and scale of the proposed care home is “out of keeping with the low density suburban nature of the surrounding area…. and would appear over dominant in the street scene and unrelated to the prevailing character of the area”. She also concluded that the proposed development would be detrimental to the living conditions of the adjoining neighbours, due to the potential risk of overlooking from the upper floor windows to the neighbouring garden and the increased noise/disturbance to the neighbouring dwelling arising from the intensity usage of the existing main site access. Although the appeal was dismissed, the Inspector found in favour of the appellant in relation to the level of parking provision and highway issues. The parallel cost application was considered favourably by the Inspector. She concluded that unreasonable behaviour of the LPA has been demonstrated in respect of the second reason for refusal (car parking and highway implications) which they were unable to substantiate at the hearing, and made a partial award of costs.

THE SITE AND SURROUNDINGS: The application site lies at the junction of Northampton Road and Kingsway. It measures 0.27 hectares in area and is currently occupied by the vacant Duke of York Public House with associated hard-standing parking areas and a small garden area to the rear of the existing building. The site is surrounded predominantly by established residential properties. It lies in an area of uneven topography and slopes downward from Northampton Road along Kingsway towards the southern common boundary with the St Edmund Campion Catholic Church.

The northern and western site boundaries face residential properties on the opposite side of the intervening roads and the north-western corner faces a Premier convenience store with residential properties beyond. The eastern boundary of the site adjoins the neighbouring residential property (no. 157 Northampton Road), the rear garden of which forms the majority of the boundary; with other residential properties and their rear gardens located beyond, along Northampton Road. There are two existing points of vehicular access to the site, which serve the two separate car parking areas; one via a point off the Northampton Road to the north and the main one from Kingsway to the west.

THE PROPOSAL Consent is sought to erect a part two and part three storey 60-bed care home, following the demolition of the existing public house and the outbuildings on the site. This proposed scheme seems to have addressed the issues raised by the Inspector in her decision, by reducing the scale and height of the building, altering the design and appearance, and rearranging the site access, etc. A new access off Kingsway would be created adjacent to the southern boundary of the site leading to 19 car parking spaces, which equate to 1 space per 3 beds. Also within the development, 3 cycling stands are to be installed adjacent to the main entrance of the care home to provide 6 cycle parking spaces for the staff and visitors.

- 29 -

The care home would incorporate residential and dementia care for elderly residents, and will offer high quality care facilities which meet the current care standards monitored by the Care Quality Commission (CQC).

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY: The application site is a purpose built public house with a history of consent for various signage and alterations. Detailed background concerning the previous proposal is given in the preceding paragraph.

NATIONAL AND LOCAL PLANNING POLICY: Planning Policy Statement 1 – Delivering Sustainable Development Planning Policy Statement 3 – Housing Planning Policy Guidance Note 13 – Transport (PPG13). North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy Policy 1 – Strengthening the Network of Settlements Policy 13 – General Sustainable Development Principles Policy 14 – Energy Efficiency and Sustainable Construction North Northamptonshire Joint Planning Unit – Sustainable Design Supplementary Planning Guidance. Supplementary Planning Guidance on Parking

SUMMARY OF REPLIES TO CONSULTATIONS/REPRESENTATIONS RECEIVED: 1. NCC Highways – the previous concerns in respect of the Framework Travel Plan have been resolved – the proposal now meets with their approval. Suggested conditions.

2. NCC Development Management – request for a financial contribution towards the provision of a fire hydrant.

3. NCC Archaeology – there is very low potential for archaeological remains to be present on the site – hence no archaeological works required.

4. Environment Agency – no objection subject to the imposition of condition relating to the phasing of the development in relation to the provision of mains foul water.

5. Anglian Water – no objection, but suggested condition on surface water strategy.

6. Northants Police – Northamptonshire Police has no formal objection to the planning application in its present form other than to suggest that the following informatives/conditions are included, which if implemented will reduce the likelihood of crime, disorder and anti-social behaviour occurring. This is in the interest of the security and quality life of future occupants of the development in accordance with Policy 13 of the North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy.

7. BCW Design and Conservation Officer – scheme has been designed in consultation with the Design Officer, who has been involved at every stage of the process from pre-application stage.

- 30 -

8. BCW Landscape Officer - this site is close to the linear park which extends from the town centre to Wilby Way. There is certainly scope for using S106 money for landscape improvements here.

9. BCW Environmental Health – I would request before any formal approval is considered that the applicant is required to provide the following:

1. Specific detail of the mechanical and natural ventilation to be provided to the kitchen area, located on the lower ground floor as none is indicated; 2. Detailed drawings and locations of refuse areas for kitchen waste and other associated waste storage provisions including clinical waste. The concern is in relation to potential pest and odour issues; 3. Details of how food deliveries are to be made to the premises and then transported to the kitchen area. At present no direct external access to the kitchen area located on the lower ground floor is indicated.

Applicant’s Response: We would request that until the main contractor has appointed a kitchen and laundry specialist, any environmental concerns are to be conditioned. DWA have built in excess of 250 homes and very much appreciate the complexities involved in these areas. Full proposals will be available as the project progresses together with any specific detail required. As part of the Full Planning submission we issued a Waste Management Strategy (DOC002, attached). This includes details of typical operations and provides a floor by floor plan including site plan of waste storage and collection. We would be happy to provide additional specific details should they be required however each operator would implement their own strict individual policy to comply with issues relating to pests, odour, delivery and collection.

10. Letter of support from the occupier of no. 176 Northampton Road.

11. Letters expressing concerns from nos. 2 and 3 Norman Way, the adjoining Catholic Church, nos. 155 and 157 Northampton Road. Concerns include:

- Insufficient information on the submitted plans – no real information provided; - Concern over the southern boundary of the site which is separated from the Church. Preference for the barrier to remain or enhanced in the interest of security; - Parking provision and resulting traffic problems and congestion; - Flawed Travel Plan; - Over-development and excessive scale/height, not in keeping with the character and appearance of the area; - Overlooking/no shade/loss of privacy; - Inaccurate representations on the submitted plans in respect of neighbouring properties.

ASSESSMENT: Principle of the Development There is no specific policy objection to the loss of public houses in the development plan, although Policy 13 of the Core Spatial Strategy seeks to protect and improve - 31 -

accessible community facilities. It is not clear whether or not the public house, prior to its closure, provided any meaningful communal function. Generally, in rural areas, public houses provide valuable recreational resource, but the community impact argument is weaker in urban areas, due to the proliferation of community facilities. In any case, the appeal Inspector accepted the principle of the development for the provision of a care home.

The proposed development accord with the principles of sustainable development through the reuse of a brownfield land as contained in PPS1. In terms of Policy 1 of the Core Spatial Strategy, it directly accords with the objective of principally directing development towards the urban core as the site is located within the growth town of Wellingborough. The requirements of Policy 14 are also met in that at least 10% of the demand for energy within the development will be met on site from renewable energy sources. These are detailed in full in the accompanying Sustainability Statement. The proposed development is appropriately sited – in a location offering a range of community facilities and with good access to key services and infrastructure. It is therefore consistent with the integrated transport strategy approach advocated by PPG13.

It should be borne in mind that this is a drinking establishment falling within Class A4 of the Use Classes Order. It could therefore be used as a fast food outlet (which has the potential for a far greater amenity impact than the proposed care home) without consent.

In response to the objectives national guidance in PPS 3, the development will extend choice in the context of the property market for the area by providing a further tenancy option for the elderly within the area. This extension of choice promotes the inclusion of the elderly within the area, aiding the mix of the local community overall. This should in turn provide ‘knock on’ benefits from a health and well being perspective.

The Care Home will create job opportunities within the area, making a contribution to the local economy. It will also provide, through the effective design of the proposals, an aesthetically pleasing addition to the local streetscape and enhance the local environment overall. The quality of build will also make a contribution from sustainability perspective, as it is set to achieve a minimum BREEAM rating of a ‘very good’.

Sustainability A Sustainability Statement has been prepared in accordance with the Sustainable Design SPD prepared by the North Northamptonshire Joint Planning Unit. The statement describes the various sustainable methods used as part of the overall design and layout in response to the issues raised within the SPD and demonstrates how the proposal conforms to the national and local aspirations from a sustainability perspective. This statement is supported by a BREEAM Assessment of the proposed development, that has been included as part of the overall application submission. The assessment outlines that the proposal achieves a BREEAM RATING OF ‘Very Good’, consistent with the requirement of Policy 14 of the Core Spatial Strategy. In addition, it is anticipated that the eventual scoring will achieve a rating of ‘excellent’. The requirements of Policy 14 are also met in that a significant proportion of the energy within the development will be met on site from renewable energy sources. These are - 32 - detailed in full in the accompanying Sustainability Statement.

Design, Layout and Appearance There have been several discussions between the developers and officers to agree a satisfactory scheme in design terms. To a significant extent, the massing and scale of the development are influenced by the site’s topography. Given the sloping nature of the site and the surroundings, the proposed care home is designed with split level from 2 to 3 storeys to break down overall massing of building. This revised scheme utilises the sloping nature of the site and provides a finished floor level of 68.25m AOD (approximately 1000mm to 3000mm below the road level), which is 1.75m below the level of the previous proposal.

When viewed from the junction of Kingsway, the proposed care home would be less prominent than the previous (appeal) scheme, as the proposed building takes an appearance of 2-storey rather than a full 3-storey building. The design of the proposed care home also reflects the Inspector’s reasoning on the design, scale, layout and other relevant issues of the appeal scheme. This has been taken into account by significantly reducing the height and footprint of the proposed building, introducing split levelled design to reduce the overall massing, increasing the separation distance between the proposed and neighbouring properties to reduce the risk of overlooking, etc. As illustrated in the submitted drawings, the proposed building is roughly L-shape, with main elevations facing Northampton Road to the north and Kingsway to the west.

As part of the proposal, a rendered corner featured with large lounge windows facing the Northampton Road/Kingsway junction would be created, not only to create an attractive focal point of this corner plot, but also reflect the shopping arcade on the other side of the junction. At the end of the west wing, a similar 2-storey corner feature facing the site access drive would be created to echo the character and appearance of the northwest corner and to soften the overall massing.

The detailed design of the building also differs from the previous scheme which appears institutional. The current scheme picks on the characteristic features of the neighbouring dwellings – with pitched roof, mixture of render and brickwork and similar fenestration. Overall, the proposed design and layout are acceptable, creating a landmark building with street presence whilst at the same time being in keeping with the character and appearance of the area.

Landscaping The submitted landscaping drawing details the hard and soft landscaping scheme. According to the application submission, the aim of the landscaping design is to provide residents with accessible and usable multi-levelled external amenity spaces in a safe and secure setting. Given the sloping nature of the site, the overall concept is to create sunken gardens at lower ground floor level within the courtyard, and a raised garden space set between the courtyard and eastern boundary of the site. Within these turfed garden areas, a smooth block paving surface route would be laid to create a safe and non-slip footpath for the residents to walk around. In order to ensure the security of the residents, the railing fences and low brick wall would be used around the garden area.

With regard to the boundary treatments, a new brick boundary wall running along the north and west boundary of the site will be created, with a line of 1800mm high railing - 33 -

fence mounted above. The existing east and west boundary fences shared with the neighbouring properties would be carefully retained and reinforced, with new shrubs and hedge to be planted along the boundary fences. A green buffer zone would be created at the space between the proposed care home and the northern boundary of the site with planted hedgerow and planting beds to enhance the amenity of the site and its neighbouring area. A full landscape scheme and maintenance plan has been submitted as part of this application.

Amenity Impact In terms of the impact of the proposed care home on the amenity of neighbouring properties, the Inspector noted in her decision notice on the appeal scheme that ‘the number of windows in the upper floors of the building facing the adjoining rear gardens would….. give an unacceptable sense of being overlooked for most of the length of the rear garden of the adjoining house’. In this instance, as the ground floor level of the west wing has been reduced by 1.75 metres, the proposed building would appear less visually dominant when viewed from the garden of neighbouring properties.

As shown in the drawings, the level of upper floor windows (on northeast elevation) looking towards neighbouring gardens has been reduced by 350mm from the previous scheme. Consequently, the risk of overlooking the amenity of neighbouring properties would be significantly reduced (the view from upper floor windows of the northeast elevation will be approximately 2.1 metres lower than the previous proposal). Furthermore, the upper floor bedroom windows are set at a 25 degree angle looking towards the south, which would further reduce the incidence of direct overlooking towards the neighbouring gardens.

The previous scheme comprised a 4-storey element formed the south wing of the care home. Due to the height of the building, the length (over 50 metres) along Kingsway and the return on the southern elevation, the Inspector considered that the proposal would be dominant and over-bearing when viewed from the garden of the neighbouring properties, whilst also appearing over dominant in the street scene. To address this issue, this revised scheme introduces a step design to the west wing to allow the roofline to fall along Kingsway, with the southern end of the west wing now reduced to only 2-storeys.

The application is also accompanied by a Daylight/Shadow Assessment to assess the potential impact of the proposed building on the amenity space on the neighbouring properties to the east. A similar exercise was carried out for the previous proposal which demonstrate some level of overshadowing to the neighbouring properties to the east at certain time during the winter and summer months. The inspector examined the evidence and considered that most late afternoon and evening sunshine would be lost from the rear garden of no. 157 which would have a considerable adverse impact on the occupiers enjoyment of their property. This revised proposal, with reduced building height, reduced footprint and the split roof levels, will demonstrably have a reduced impact on the amenities of nos. 155 and 157 Northampton Road.

In the light of the foregoing, it is considered that the current proposal would not have a significant impact on the living conditions of the neighbouring occupiers. As mentioned above, it is worth reiterating that this site has a lawful use as a drinking establishment falling within Class A4 of the Use Classes Order. It could therefore be used as a fast - 34 - food outlet (which has the potential for a far greater amenity impact than the proposed care home) without consent.

Access, Transport and Parking Issues The new proposal adopts the access points endorsed by the Inspector, whilst in turn omits the secondary access on Northampton Road. The new site access is located approximately 76 metres away from the Northampton Road/Kingsway junction, and visibility splays of 2.4 x 70 metres to both directions of Kingsway can be achieved in compliance with Table 7.1 of “Manual for Streets”. Adjacent to the site entrance, 19 parking spaces (including two for disabled parking) and a bicycle store are proposed for the use of staff and visitors. We believe this level of provision would be more than acceptable, given the highly accessible location of the application site and the likelihood of local people being employed.

The adopted Supplementary Planning Guidance (SPG) on Parking sets out the maximum parking standard for each type of development. This maximum standard will allow for variations, depending on the individual characteristics of each site. In terms of care home development (use class C2), the Council’s standard requires 2 parking spaces per 5 residents, and the provision of 1 cycle parking space per 10 bedrooms. In this instance, 19 parking spaces (including 2 disable parking bays) and 6 cycle parking spaces would be provided within the site for the use of staff and visitors. This provision equates to approximately 1 car parking space per 3 bed space, and 1 cycle parking space per 7.5 bed spaces. This level of parking provision is higher than the previous proposal (16 spaces for 72-bed care home) which the Inspector found adequate to serve the need of the development.

In relation to this scheme, it is expected that the car and cycle parking spaces provided within the site would be mainly for the use of care home staff and visitors, as no residents of the care home would be car owners or drivers due to old age and infirmity. Given the site location, availability of wide range of public transport services, and the proximity to the main residential settlement, the applicants claim that most of the care home staff could be drawn from the neighbouring area. Consequently, it is likely that they will travel to work by walking, cycling or public transport.

Designing Out Crime The proposal has been designed in accordance with the ‘Planning Out Crime in Northamptonshire’ SPG (February 2004), and accordingly has been structured to ensure that the design offers a safe environment to its future users. Through this use of strategic design processes, crime and the fear of crime can be significantly reduced within the care home environment.

Flood Risk, Foul Sewage and Utilities The site is outside an area recognised as having a high risk of flooding and the Environment Agency have raised no objection to the proposal. Both storm and foul drainage will utilise existing mains systems, although new connections will be provided as part of the development.

Planning Obligations Various requests have been made for financial contributions to provide fire hydrants and improvements to nearby open space. Provisions in respect of safety measures are - 35 -

covered under separate legislation. In respect of open space contribution, it should be borne in mind that this is not a residential development with the possibility of children occupiers. This is a facility for the elderly in an institutional/non-family setting. Besides, there is a courtyard amenity space within the development. In the circumstances, these obligations are unnecessary and would be likely to be challenged successfully if insisted upon. There can be no doubt that they would fail the tests of Circular 05/2005: Planning Obligations.

Conclusion In the light of the foregoing, the proposal is recommended for approval.

RECOMMENDATION: Approve with the following conditions.

1. The development shall be begun not later than the expiration of three years beginning with the date of this permission. 2. Notwithstanding any materials specified on the application form and/or the drawings, particulars and samples of the materials to be used on all external surfaces of the buildings, including fenestration, windows, doors, eaves and verges shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority before the commencement of the development. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details. 3. Details of hard and soft landscaping and the boundary treatments including gates, fence and other means of enclosure shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority before the commencement of the development. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details. 4. No development shall commence until details of a scheme, including phasing, for the provision of mains foul water drainage on and off site has been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. No dwellings shall be occupied until the works have been carried out in accordance with the approved scheme. 5. Prior to the occupation of the development, works shall be carried out in accordance to a surface water strategy which shall have been submitted to and approved by the local planning authority. 6. Prior to the commencement of development, a scheme detailing the security standards to be incorporated within all openings associated with the development shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority in consultation with the Police CPDA and in line with the recommendations of Secured By Design. The development shall be implemented in accordance with the approved details. 7. Details of the mechanical and natural ventilation to the kitchen area, located on the lower ground floor shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority before the commencement of the development. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details. 8. The approved development shall be used as a residential care home falling within Class C2 of the Town and Country Planning (Use Classes) Order and for no other purpose (including any other purpose in Class C2 of the Order or any statutory instrument revoking or re-enacting the Order with or without - 36 -

modification. 9. The vehicular crossing shall be constructed complete with informal pedestrian crossings with tactile paving, existing redundant crossings onto Northampton Road and Kingsway closed and all highway surfaces where affected by the proposals reinstated in accordance with the specification of Northamptonshire County Council and to an appropriate Licence or Agreement. 10. Vehicle to vehicle visibility of 2.4m x 43m and pedestrian to vehicle visibility of 2m x 2m above a height of 0.6m shall be provided and maintained on both sides of the point of access to the site. Planting on either sides of the points of vehicular and pedestrian access into the site shall be controlled to comply with this requirement.

Reasons: 1. Required to be imposed pursuant to S51 of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004. 2. To ensure that the appearance of the development is satisfactory in the interest of visual amenity. 3. To enhance the visual amenity of the area. 4. To prevent flooding, pollution and detriment to public amenity through provision of suitable water infrastructure. 5. To prevent environmental and amenity problems arising from flooding. 6. In the interest of the security and quality life of future occupants of the development in accordance with Policy 13 of the North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy. 7. In the interest of neighbouring residential amenities. 8. In order to properly assess the other uses within the Use Class and to protect neighbouring amenities by ensuring that other uses which could result in a loss of amenity do not occur without the approval of the local planning authority. 9. In the interest of highway safety. 10. In the interest of highway safety.

monitored/secured by electronic keypad access/or restricted and controlled from a reception area. Emergency exit doors should also be linked in and alarmed. Front office should be located so that staff can view the entrance doors and clearly see who is leaving and visiting the premises. All external Entry/Exit doors should meet Pas 24:2007 or equivalent security rating. This includes any rear/front patio doors. Doors (ground floor) - In addition to the above, doors at ground floor should be fitted with 6.4mm laminated safety glass and have window restrictors. Windows - All windows should conform to a minimum performance of BS7950. Windows (ground floor) - In addition to the above, windows at ground floor should be fitted with 6.4mm laminated and toughened safety glass. How the drugs will be stored and protected (what standards will the storage be e.g.BS288). The bin store should be at least 5 metres away from any building. Access to bin stores should not be sited next to escape routes, final exits or rear windows of dwellings. Bin storage areas should be separated by structure giving 60mins fire resistance, from the rest of the building. Bin storage should not be sited next to emergency exits as should the bin store catch fire residents will not be able to evacuate. The building frontage would benefit from having defensible space to prevent window knocking or reach through theft/burglary. The development should be built to attain the Secured by Design (SBD) accreditation, which if implemented will reduce the likelihood of crime, disorder and anti-social behaviour occurring. 4. The applicant/developer is advised that no works, including planting or the features at the pedestrian entrance, may commence within the existing highway without the express written permission of the Highway Authority. Planning Permission does not give or infer such consent. Such consent may be forthcoming subject to the completion of a suitable licence or agreement under the Highways Act 1980.

- 38 -

BOROUGH COUNCIL OF WELLINGBOROUGH

Planning Committee 09/05/2012

Report of the Head of Planning and Development

APPLICATION REF: WP/2012/0094/F

PROPOSAL: Erection of 2 no. dwellings. Amended Plans.

LOCATION: Land adjacent 10 Doddington Road, Wilby, Wellingborough.

APPLICANT: Mr R Riley.

This application is referred to the Planning Committee for determination at the request of Councillor Scarborough.

PROPOSAL AND DESCRIPTION OF SITE: As described. The development comprises of two detached dwellings that step up from no. 10 Doddington Road. The scheme includes four off road car parking spaces for the new development and also illustrated are two off road spaces for no. 179 Main Road, Wilby.

The site comprises of garden land associated with no. 179 Main Road and backs onto the Earls Barton Road which is set at higher level. The site slopes down generally from the north to the south and is at a noticeably higher ground level than Doddington Road.

Growing in the site are a number of mature trees that are subject to a Tree Preservation Order. In the south-western corner of the site are the remnants of a demolished garage together with a concrete forecourt which access onto Doddington Road.

The development nearby comprises of detached, semi-detached and terraced dwellings that have a variety of designs and which utilise a medley of exterior facing materials. There are no on street parking restrictions and several of the dwellings on the opposite side of the road have had their front gardens hard surfaced to provide off street parking.

There is a stretch of footway running from the application site upto Main Road which was ‘unearthed’ during the determination of a previous application. The stretch of footpath clearly has not been maintained and is beginning to again become covered with leaves and detritus.

An amended plan was received on 5 March 2012.

WP/2012/0094/F 177

136 El Sub Sta A

142 GP Mortholme 3

146 5

Shelter 15

12 25 78.0m 69.2m

14 29

MAIN ROAD

A DODDINGTON ROAD

Legend WP/2012/0094/F - Land Adjacent 10 Doddington Road, Wilby

Planning & Local Development © Crown Copyright Description and database right 2012. Scale: Ordnance Survey 100018694. Applicants Property This map is accurate 1:1,250 Cities Revealed to the scale specified Aerial Photography copyright: when reproduced at A4 Application Site ± GetMapping PLC 1999 - 39 -

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY: BW/85/1113/O Site for detached dwelling – deemed refused BW/88/1000/O Site for detached dwelling – conditionally approved BW/88/1140/O Site for erection of two bungalows and garages – allowed at appeal WP/91/0342/O Site for erection of one dwelling - conditionally approved WP/94/0371/O Renewal of outline planning permission WP/91/0342(O) site for erection of one dwelling – conditionally approved WP/98/0076 Erection of detached dormer bungalow - conditionally approved WP/2008/0327/F Erection of 3 no. dwellings within curtilage of existing property and relocation of parking to existing dwelling - conditionally approved WP/2009//0112 Erection of 2 no. dwellings - conditionally approved

No. 179 Main Road WP/2009/0222 Extension, garage, vehicular access and associated alterations - conditionally approved.

Tree Preservation Orders A/1000/0024 – 57 individual trees and three groups.

NATIONAL GUIDANCE, DEVELOPMENT PLAN POLICY AND SUPPLEMENTARY PLANNING DOCUMENTS/GUIDANCE National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy 1 (Strengthening the network of Settlements) 13 (General sustainable development principles) and 14 (Energy efficiency and sustainable construction) Borough of Wellingborough Local Plan: G4 (Development within the limited development and restricted infill villages) Supplementary Planning Documents; Northamptonshire Minerals and Waste Development Framework – Development and Implementation Principles, Sustainable Design, Biodiversity Supplementary Planning Guidance: Parking, Planning Out Crime.

SUMMARY OF REPLIES TO CONSULTATIONS/REPRESENTATIONS RECEIVED: 1. Wilby Parish Council – no comment received.

2. Northamptonshire County Council, Highway Authority –

“I refer to your letter of 24 February 2012 and, because of the minor nature of the proposals, return the above application with a sticker.

Vehicular crossings must be constructed and all highway surfaces affected by the proposals reinstated in accordance with the specification of Northamptonshire County Council and subject to an appropriate licence or agreement under the Highways Act 1980.

To prevent loose material being carried onto the public highway the first 5m of the driveways must be paved with a hard-bound surface. A positive means of drainage shall be installed to ensure that surface water from the vehicular access does not discharge onto the highway.

- 40 -

The gradient of the vehicular accesses shall not exceed 1 in 15 for the first 5m from the highway boundary.

A suitable means of demarcation must be used to mark the line of the highway boundary over the frontage of the site.

A permanent, non-climbable form of fencing must be provided on the frontage of the application site to Main Road.”

3. Borough Council of Wellingborough Council Landscape Architect – no comment received, but lodged the following comments in relation to the previous application.

“The row of lime trees along the A4500 highway boundary and the large copper beech tree fronting the site in Doddington Road are included in the tree preservation order which covers this part of Wilby. The plan which has been submitted appears to show the correct locations of the trees but no other survey information on them has been provided. The sycamore shown to be removed is in fact a box maple (Acer negundo). This tree is not in good shape and is not included in the tree preservation order. The other smaller trees and shrubs are indicated as being removed but they are not identified. They do not appear to be of sufficient amenity value to represent a constraint.

The canopy spread of the copper beech tree is greatly in excess of that which has been shown on the plan. It would appear to be just about possible to build this development without damaging the tree, but unit one is less than two metres from the edge of the canopy which would not allow much of a working area. The sloping nature of the site is an additional complication. There could be a problem of drains affecting the tree which would not be apparent at this stage. If planning permission is granted there should be a condition requiring adequate protective fencing in accordance with BS5837 for the beech tree and the lime trees.”

4. Northamptonshire County Council Archaeological Advisor – provides a brief historical context of the site and opines that there is the potential for archaeological remains to survive. The Advisor identifies that the proposed development will have a detrimental impact on any archaeological deposits that could be present, but under the circumstances, it does not represent an overriding constraint. A condition for an archaeological programme of works in accordance with the provisions of PPS 5 is suggested.

5. Wellingborough Council’s Environmental Protection Service – identifies that the site is located on Northampton Sand Strata which is likely to contain elevated levels of naturally occurring arsenic and suggests that a condition to investigate and remediate the potential hazard be included in any approval.

6. Western Power – no objections.

7. Neighbours – an objection has been raised by the occupiers of 19 Doddington Road. - 41 -

The owner of 13 Doddington Road has raised a number of concerns which relate to:

• surface water drainage arrangements • steepness of gradient of the site in relation to the access road • increase in traffic during construction • communication with neighbours during the construction period.

ASSESSMENT: The material planning considerations are:

• Compliance with policy • Highway safety • Effect on the setting of a listed building • Effect on visual amenity and character of the area • Effect on neighbours amenities • Archaeology • Crime and disorder • Biodiversity • Effect on the Upper Nene Valley Special Protection Area

Compliance with policy The principle of an infill development taking place within the Wilby village policy line accords with Policy 1 of the North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy and with saved Policy G4 of the Borough of Wellingborough Local Plan.

The recently NPPF maintains the removal of domestic gardens from the definition of previously-developed or brownfield land, and the weight given to this aspect of the development should be adjusted accordingly. Nevertheless, the new guidance does not amount to a complete prohibition on the development of garden areas and paragraph 55 promotes sustainable development in rural areas where housing should be located where it will enhance or maintain the vitality of rural communities.

The application, therefore, still has to be considered in the light of all relevant objectives and polices and the application is subject to detailed consideration of the specific requirement for an emphasis on the importance of good design and development plan policies which require consideration of all the other relevant issues.

The existence of an extant planning permission for residential development on the site is also a material consideration which should be accorded significant weight.

Highway safety The comments of the Highway Authority and the nearby concerned property owner are acknowledged. However, it is considered that all the highway and associated surface water drainage issues which have been raised can be adequately dealt with by way of appropriately worded conditions. These would require the gradient to be satisfactory and surfacing and drainage details would have to be submitted for approval before - 42 -

development commences and would have to be implemented before occupation of the dwellings.

Trees The Council’s Landscape Architect has evaluated the scheme in relation to the trees on the site and is, overall, content with the proposal even though some trees will have to be removed and others to a greater or lesser degree are affected. It is accepted that some trees will have to be removed to facilitate the development but it is not considered that their loss will be overly significant, bearing mind the number of trees that will be retained on the site, to warrant refusing the application.

Effect on visual amenity and character of the area With regards the NPPF, paragraph 56 says the Government attaches great importance to the design of the built environment. Good design is a key aspect of sustainable development, is indivisible from good planning, and should contribute positively to making places better for people.

The garage building that stood on the site has been demolished and it is considered the modestly sized dwellings with a design that will harmonise with the other dwellings nearby will have a positive impact on the street scene.

Effect on neighbours’ amenities The development will have an effect on the amenities that the occupiers of the neighbouring dwellings currently enjoy. It is thought, however, that any lessening of the standard of amenities will not be so significant to withhold planning permission, despite the slope of the land, for the following reasons:

• the residual standard of privacy will still be acceptable • there will be sufficient space between the flank wall of the pair of semi-detached dwellings and the adjacent dwellings to the southwest to ensure there will not be an overly harmful effect on light reception or cause a deleterious massing effect, despite the difference in ground levels.

A condition is recommended to ensure that the first floor window in the south-western elevation of unit no. 1 shall be obscure glazed and remain as such thereafter.

Archaeology The consultee comments are noted, however, PPS5 has been superseded by the NPPF. Nonetheless, the intent of the Government’s new advice regarding archaeology restates the importance of archaeology as a heritage asset and this significance has been carried forward into the framework. It is considered that the archaeological matters which have been identified can be satisfactorily addressed by way of a condition based on the comment of the County Council’s Archaeology advisor, but amended to reflect the guidance contained in the NPPF.

Crime and disorder Apart from the parking issues mentioned above there are no pertinent crime and order issues to be considered.

- 43 -

Biodiversity Other than the trees mentioned above, no other biodiversity issues have been identified within the scope of the application.

Effect on the Upper Nene Valley Special Protection Area It is anticipated that the proposed development will not have a significant effect on the Special Protection Area.

Conclusion It is considered that there are no significantly detracting factors which weigh against recommending the application for approval, subject to conditions.

RECOMMENDATION: Approve, subject to conditions.

1. The development shall be begun not later than the expiration of three years beginning with the date of this permission. 2. Representative samples of all external facing and roofing materials shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority before the development is commenced and the development shall be carried out using the approved materials. 3. An Environmental Risk Assessment (ERA) to identify potential arsenic contamination of the site shall be submitted to the local planning authority prior to the commencement of the development. Should the ERA identify any contamination, it shall contain measures for its remediation that shall be approved in writing by the local planning authority. The site shall be remediated to the satisfaction of the local planning authority prior to the occupation of the development. 4. Before development commences a landscaping scheme shall be submitted to and approved by the local planning authority. The scheme shall be implemented concurrently with the development and shall be completed not later than the first planting season following the substantial completion of the development. Any trees and shrubs removed, dying, being severely damaged or becoming seriously diseased within five years of planting shall be replaced by trees and shrubs of similar size and species to those originally required to be planted or other species as may be agreed. 5. Before development commences a tree protection scheme in accordance with BS5837 shall be submitted to the local planning authority for approval in writing. The approved scheme shall be implemented before development commences and shall be retained to the satisfaction of the local planning authority while construction takes place on the site. 6. Before development commences the finished floor levels of the dwellings shall be submitted to the local planning authority and approved in writing. The development shall be carried out in accord with the approved details. 7. The off road car parking spaces illustrated for no. 10 Doddington Road shall be brought into use (subject to conditions 7 and 8 below) before the new dwellings are first occupied. 8. The gradient of the vehicular accesses for the new dwellings and no. 10 Doddington Road shall not be greater than 1:15. - 44 -

9. Before development commences a scheme to prevent surface water drainage from the accesses for the new dwellings and no. 10 Doddington Road onto the highway shall be submitted to the local planning authority and approved in writing. The approved scheme shall be implemented before the development is first occupied. 10. No development shall take place on the approved site until the applicant, or their agents or successors in title, has secured the implementation of a programme of archaeological work in accordance with a written scheme of investigation which has been submitted to the local planning authority and been approved in writing. 11. The first floor window in the south-western elevation of unit no. 1 shall be obscure glazed and shall remain as such hereafter. 12. Before development commences a scheme for screen fencing/walling shall be submitted to the local planning authority for approval in writing. The approved scheme shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the local planning authority before the dwellinghouses are first occupied.

Reasons: 1. Required to be imposed pursuant to S51 of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004. 2. In the interests of visual amenity. 3. In the interest of health and safety of the occupiers of the development. 4. In the interests of visual amenity. 5. To protect the trees on the site that are subject to a Tree Preservation Order. 6. In the interests of visual and residential amenity. 7. In the interests of ensuring an adequate off road car parking provision for the existing dwellinghouse. 8. In the interests of highway safety. 9. In the interests of highway safety and achieving sustainable urban drainage. 10. To ensure that features of archaeological interest are properly examined and recorded in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework. 11. In the interests of privacy. 12. In the interests of visual amenity, security and privacy.

INFORMATIVES 1. Pursuant to Section 38 (6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004, the proposed development complies with the applicable development plan policies and there are no other material considerations that would constitute sustainable grounds for refusal. These include specifically the following policies: North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy 1 (Strengthening the network of Settlements) 13 (General sustainable development principles) and 14 (Energy efficiency and sustainable construction) Borough of Wellingborough Local Plan: G4 (Development within the limited development and restricted infill villages). 2. The developer/applicant is advised that the Government has recently introduced a new tariff called Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) to support the funding of local infrastructure. This is due to come into effect very soon and will be applicable to all development proposals. If this consent is not acted upon promptly and the development commenced, any attempt to renew the consent or extend the life of the consent in future may be liable to such tariff payment. - 45 -

3. The applicant is advised that this decision relates to the following drawing numbers received on the date shown: Drawing Number: Date Received: 32-08-100B 5 March 2012 4. The applicant is advised that planning permission does not automatically allow the construction of the vehicle crossing, details of which require the approval of the Highway Authority. In this regard you should contact the Team Leader Regulations, Sustainable Transport, Riverside House, Riverside Way, Northampton NN1 5NX prior to any construction/excavation works within the public highway. 5. The Public Health Act 1875 and the Town Improvement Clauses Act 1847 at S.64 Prior to occupation of the newly created premises(s), the street numbering for this development must be agreed with the Street Naming and Numbering Officer. When issued, the number allocated must be clearly displayed on the outside of the property. Application forms for Street Naming and Numbering are available at www.wellingborough.gov.uk - 46 -

BOROUGH COUNCIL OF WELLINGBOROUGH

Planning Committee 09/05/2012

Report of the Head of Planning and Development

APPLICATION REF: WP/2012/0154/TC

PROPOSAL: Installation of BT DSLAM cabinet (Prior Notification).

LOCATION: Outside Central Hall Buildings, 1a High Street, Wellingborough.

APPLICANT: BT Openreach.

This application is brought before the Planning Committee for determination due to a request by Councillor Hawkes.

PROPOSAL AND DESCRIPTION OF SITE: The development site is located within Wellingborough Town Centre Conservation to the northern periphery of the central core on the corner of Oxford/High Street on an area of footpath to the front and left of a window to the Euronics Centre.

The proposal is as above and is to a height of approximately 1.4m to a width of 0.75m with a brown colouring proposed. The cabinet is part of a BT investment in infrastructure to increase the broadband speed of the existing service to 40mb per second to download.

Before installing certain telecommunications apparatus under permitted development rights, the operator must apply to the planning authority for a determination as to whether their approval of the siting and appearance of the development is required. Prior notification is required in this case due to the location of the proposed cabinet within a conservation area.

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY: WP/2011/0564/TC 1 x BT DSLAM cabinet - Outside 61-62 -Oxford Street, Wellingborough – refused.

NATIONAL AND LOCAL PLANNING POLICY: North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy: 13 (General Sustainable Development Principles) National Planning Policy Framework Wellingborough Town Centre: Conservation Area Appraisal.

WP/2012/0154/TC

HIGH STREET

Orchard Terrace

Surgery Court 1 to 9 to 1

Tresham Institute 14a High Street

Congregational Wellingborough Campus 14 A Church

PH 10

Queens Lane

66.4m

3 1

FS 31 2

32 Hall 33 27 CHURCH STREET 34

8 65.8m

8b Priory

TCB War Meml A

Club 2 Cottage 7 37

6 39

5 30 A

Cromwell 31

3 TA Centre 10 Cottage

Leighton Coach House 32

2 64.6m

35 34

High Street Place Orient Posts 40 House Leighton HIGH STREET House 41 WELLINGBOROUGH 42 Club CHURCH WAY

2 to 5 ORIENT Flats 1 to 4

1 1 WAY 45 (above)

1d 50

Leighton Place 1c 1b PH High Street Mews ANGEL LANE

1 1a 17 Posts

Poplar Place LB

5 17b 3

61.3m to

18 1

3 61

15 21a

1 60c 1a 60b Bank 60d

60a 12 24

OXFORD STREET SILVER STREET

10 25

11a 9a 26

11b 9

58a to 59 8

63.7m 7 58.5m 6

5 2 to 5 to 2

63.1m 4a 4

58 Warehouse A

Garage

10 11

48b BURYSTEAD 48a 62.2m

Waterloo Yard

Tithe Barn 17

17a 17b

Planning & Local Development © Crown Copyright and database right 2012. Scale: Ordnance Survey 100018694. Legend This map is accurate 1:1,250 Cities Revealed to the scale specified Aerial Photography copyright: when reproduced at A4 WP/2012/0154/TC - Outside Central Hall Buildings, 1a High Street, Wellingborough ± GetMapping PLC 1999 - 47 -

SUMMARY OF REPLIES TO CONSULTATIONS/REPRESENTATIONS RECEIVED: 1. Conservation Officer – “no objection”.

2. NCC (Highways) – “As it comprises operations within the public highway by a statutory undertaker it is not appropriate for me to comment on the application. The proposal will be monitored and processed by Northamptonshire County Council as Street Authority under New Roads and Street Works Act procedures”

3. Third Party Comment -

“It makes more sense in this new location.”

4. Third Party Objector - 1a Central Hall Buildings, High Street

“We wish to object to the proposed position of the new BT DSLAM cabinet in front of our building.

We would question for what reason/s does it have to be moved???

For your information, when we upgraded our shop frontage a few years ago, we spent considerable time, effort and money, making sure the design was suitable, tasteful and in keeping with the locality and planning requirements. So much so, that we are very pleased with how it looks. It is a major focal point on a very prominent corner of Oxford Street/Silver Street.

We consider the proposed positioning of the cabinet will somewhat spoil what we have achieved.

We have previously had to place objection when an advertising 'bollard' was installed in front of our Oxford Street elevation. Initially, it was installed right in front of one of our windows and as far as we remember, we received little consultation when it was installed. It was installed during the evening when we were closed; came in next day and there it was!!!

Fortunately, with help from David Cross (the Town Centre Manager at the time), we managed to negotiate to get it moved slightly away from our building which, in our opinion, is still not ideal, but the only compromise we were able to achieve with the Council.

We mention about this 'bollard' simply to reinforce our objection to the current application for the installation of yet another unwanted 'eyesore' in front of our building.

Just a thought but would it be possible for BT to re-think their strategy, and position the cabinet a few feet to the right of the existing cabinet, i.e. with the right-hand side of the new cabinet in line with the vertical joint of where our building meets Regent House or alternatively, right next to the existing one, which perhaps could make for a more straightforward engineering procedure for BT.”

- 48 -

ASSESSMENT: The planning authority in determining applications of this type should not question the need for the development and allowing for technical constraints offer advice as to where the cabinet would have least impact, whilst accepting that the apparatus would be required to be permitted. The technical constraints in this circumstance are that the cabinet has to be positioned within 50m of the junction box.

The key issue with regard this application is the cabinet’s appearance in the street scene in the context of the Conservation Area, the adjacent Listed Building and the building it fronts. The detail of a previously considered and refused site is discussed below, which is included as the objector has offered a comparable siting as an alternative to the proposed:

Previous Application The previous application as described above was to position the cabinet to the front of the adjacent listed building and close to the roadway. The fronting listed building is in a prominent location in close proximity to a Town Centre gateway and primary node and forms an important view (from the west) as described in The Conservation Area Appraisal which presents a bustling wide junction with the Church spire above the roof tops with Listed Buildings (including the subject LB) in the foreground for added historic context resulting in a vibrant pleasing Town scene with historical interest.

This application was refused because the scene suffers from the presence of a number of features including road signs, a grey cabinet to the right, a dual split street light, also present is a letter box (street scene neutral) and an advertisement pillar. There is also an existing cabinet abutting the Listed Building which does harm the appearance of the Listed property as viewed from face on but has little presence to the important view due to its siting against a building. The introduction of the cabinet was considered to further harm the setting of the Listed Building as viewed from face on adding to the impact of the current cabinet especially given the light colouring of the building. The cabinet was also considered to further erode the view as described above to the visual harm of the setting of the Conservation Area and located sufficiently enough away from existing clutter to be considered separately and therefore unacceptable. It is important wherever possible to retain such views where the LPA has a modicum of control and street furniture placed sensitively and sparingly. Whilst the impact of the proposal may not be massive it would have represented a further erosion of this mostly pleasant streetscene and harmful to the setting of the listed building. In addition the height of the cabinet is higher than the existing and would likely compromise the use of the window to 61-62 Oxford Street and may also present a planning out crime concern.

Impact of Proposed Cabinet on the Conservation Area The cabinet is to be pushed up against the wall of 1a High Street and would therefore have a negligible effect in terms of introducing addition street clutter and in particular would not be particularly prominent in the important street scene view from the west which would include the church spire. Whilst the cabinet may be seen in the same periphery view immediately to the front of the Listed Building adjacent (61-62 -Oxford Street) as it does not immediately front the designated building the buildings historical setting is not considered to be adversely compromised any more than currently exists. The cabinet does introduce a degree of clutter to the visual appeareance of the Euronics centre but given its unremarkable architectural style and build materials - 49 -

particularly to the ground floor and that the windows will remain unobscured there is not considered to be any harmful impact towards the setting of 1a High Street. In addition the proposed cabinet is to be brown in hue which would further lessen the effect it has on the Euronics building. The Conservation Officer concurs with no objection offered.

Alternative sites As part of the submission it is important that where the cabinet may have an impact either to amenity or the streetscene that an exercise has been carried out as to whether or not alternative sites have been considered. The caveat to alternative sites is that the cabinet has to be positioned within 50m of the junction box. It is considered that any cabinet placed on Silver Street or High Street would not be appropriate due to the widths of the pathway. It is also opined that any alternative position including the site subject to the refusal to the same side of Oxford Street would harm either the pleasant appeal of the streetscene or the setting of a listed building or a more architecturally noteworthy building. Finally it was considered whether the cabinet could be placed in one of the alcoves to the opposite site of the street, unfortunately as these are set within Morrisons curtilage a wayleave agreement would have to be entered into, which are usually refused to protect the owners interests.

Other Considerations The biodiversity is unaffected and the development does not result in obstruction of the pathway and the principles of non-discrimination have been followed through-out and would not harm the amenities of neighbouring properties.

Conclusion On balance it is considered that the proposed location of the apparatus, having discounted other inappropriate sites for either technical or amenity reasons, together with the more harmonious colour (brown) proposed is considered to be acceptable with no detrimental harm to either the visual appeal of the street scene or the setting of the building or the adjacent listed building. It is recommended that the application be approved and therefore that no prior approval be required.

RECOMMENDATION: Prior Notification Approved/No Further Approval Required.

BOROUGH COUNCIL OF WELLINGBOROUGH

Planning Committee 09/05/2012

Report of the Head of Planning and Development

APPLICATION REF: WP/2012/0188/F

PROPOSAL: Front, rear and side extensions and new roof dormers - amended scheme following withdrawn application WP/2012/0092/F.

LOCATION: 15 Gray Close, Earls Barton, Northampton. NN6 0PT

APPLICANT: Mr S Bush.

The application comes before the Planning Committee for determination due to the level of third party objections and at the request of the Parish Council.

PROPOSAL AND DESCRIPTION OF SITE: The development site is located within and to the eastern village boundary of Earls Barton at the end of the cul-de-sac; Gray Close. The proposal is as above and would involve a lifting of the existing bungalows roof by 2m to incorporate a first floor featuring dormer windows together with a rear extension to the same heights. Towards the front is a 2 storey extension 1m lower and then a stepping down again to a front single storey extension.

NOTE: This is a re-submission of withdrawn scheme that was part of April’s Planning Committee agenda. Essentially the proposal is the same as previously submitted although the block plan has been altered slightly to be a true representation of the existing dwellings footprint as the Ordnance Survey map relied upon was inaccurate and thus made elements of the report erroneous. In addition a streetscene view has been included.

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY: WP/2012/0188/F Front, rear and side extensions and new roof dormers – withdrawn.

NATIONAL AND LOCAL PLANNING POLICY: North Northants Core Spatial Strategy: 13 SPG: II, IV and V and Design SPD National Planning Policy Framework

SUMMARY OF REPLIES TO CONSULTATIONS/REPRESENTATIONS RECEIVED: 1. NCC (Highways) - “refer to standing advice”.

2. Earls Barton Parish Council – GRANGE

WP/2012/0188/F

87.8m

COWPER CLOSE

1 8 The Steading

GRAY CLOSE 15 18

BURNS CLOSE 18

Planning & Local Development © Crown Copyright and database right 2012. Scale: Ordnance Survey 100018694. Legend This map is accurate 1:697 Cities Revealed to the scale specified Aerial Photography copyright: when reproduced at A4 ± GetMapping PLC 1999 WP/2012/0188/F - 15 Gray Close Earls Barton - 51 -

“Earls Barton Parish Council object to the application based on overdevelopment of the site and the adverse effect it will have on the street scene. A concern has also been raised with the Parish Council over the accuracy of the maps used in the application. Please could you look into this.”

3. Third Party objections -

13 Gray Close

“These plans are identical to a previous submission with only the block view being amended.

The proposal is presented as an extension however it amounts to a complete rebuild with virtually all the internal walls and most of the present exterior walls disappearing. The dormer windows are not into an existing roof but to a totally new roof.

The use of different scales and the non lining up of the new and proposed elevations makes interpretation difficult.

The new plans include a so-called ¿street view¿. In fact this is the view from the public footpath in front of the property. Since it is at the end of the close the street view is of the side of the property i.e. of a solid wall and solid three level roofs.

EFFECT OF PROPOSALS ON THE NEIGHBOURHOOD:- The proposals would create an exceptionally large property with 2 bathrooms, cloakroom, study, utility room, playroom as well as large living areas and bedrooms. The footprint proposed is more than double the size of the original bungalow and about double the size of the adjacent 4 bed roomed property. As such it is totally out of scale and out of character with the properties in the neighbourhood.

The present bungalow enjoys congruity with its neighbours and with the other properties in front of it along the public footpath skirting the estate. Those in front are single storey bungalows. All have been extended but roof lines have been largely retained and all remain bungalows.

The size of the roof proposed is enormous rising from the same level as the present bungalows roof to the same height as the adjacent house. The roof line is at three different levels, considerably higher than at present and would be clearly seen from the road and many of the properties in the road particularly the even numbered properties and from properties in Cowper Close. The higher roofed part of the proposal extends well beyond the rear of the adjacent house and much closer too it, the whole roof projecting about 8.5 m in front of the adjacent house. The pitches of the roof are totally different from neighbouring properties. There are no other dormer bungalows in the area.

- 52 -

Gray Close enjoys sweeping views across the surrounding countryside. This is because the estate is on a sloping hillside with bungalows at the end of the closes, each close lower down the hill being shorter than its predecessor. This enables views over roof tops as well as between buildings and the open end of the close. The road also slopes at an angle to the houses. Much of these views would be blocked by the proposed 4 metre forward extension enclosing the end of the close. The views from some Cowper Close houses will also be blocked. The fact that Gray Close has better views than the other closes is an argument for retaining them rather than restricting them. We may not have a planning entitlement to views but this represents urbanisation of a rural street scene.

Such a large building on this edge of the village would also have an adverse effect on the view of the village from Mill Lane and the surrounding valley and countryside. There are no other buildings of this size on this edge of the village.

By virtue of its size there would be extra traffic generated. There is already a difficult access to number 13 since its drive leads directly towards the pavement and any vehicle parked at the end of the close makes access almost impossible. There would also be substantial problems generated by construction traffic and the storage of materials.

No mention is made in these plans for the applicant¿s proposals for garage, car port and car parking ¿ however he has mentioned those plans to me. Surely these should be included in this application.

EFFECTS OF THE PROPOSAL ON OUR PROPERTY:- All the above affect our property.

The proposed rear and side extensions would extend about 2.32 metres beyond our rear wall and much closer too it blocking both the light to the dining room and garden and the views from our rear windows and garden In fact our rear dining room window would have a view of a wall and gutter.

The views from our front windows and light to them would be restricted by the proposed forward extension. The light to our hallway would be severely restricted and its window would be in direct line of the new front door and window of no 15.

The height of the roof would block light and sunlight from our rear garden for a large part of the year.

The forward extension is in breach of the nationally accepted 45 degree rule and the rearwards extension is borderline.

SUMMARY:- In short the planned property would be much too large for this location and totally out of character with it. The proposal is a substantial overdevelopment of the site. It would have an adverse effect on the local environment as well as a highly detrimental effect on our property.

- 53 -

We are not against some development to the property but feel in accordance with council policy it should be sympathetic to and in keeping with its neighbours.”

11 Gray Close

“1 the size of the property is totally out of keeping with its neighbours 2 the brick wall and large roof are too high and will have a detrimental effect on the close and surrounding properties 3 the site is over developed 4 the street scene on the planning application appears to be misleading and the properties are incorrectly numbered 5 the planning notice has been placed outside our property (11 Gray Close) not the property seeking permission (15 Gray Close) causing confusion”

16 Gray Close

“Having seen the applicants letter dated 12Feb it is not correct to say that there was full consultation with the neighbours. Certainly I had not been approached.

Our main concern is the proposed size of the development which I felt was not in keeping OR in character with that end of the close and for that reason I object to the proposal.”

4. By way of a rebuttal to the above objections the applicant offers the below comments, also provided was a number of photographs, some in Gray Close showing the variance in property types and examples of permitted extensions in the area -

“Development of Plans Having close links with Earls Barton, with my partner Kerry’s family going back generations we fully appreciate the history and characteristics of the village that make it such a beautiful place to live. We have therefore spent quite some time developing our plans over the past couple of months to ensure we take on board neighbours and planning official’s views and come up with a design that best suits our growing family needs whilst having little impact on both the village character and immediate neighbour’s quality of life.

Prior to submission we spent some time talking with planners and immediate neighbours (in particular no. 13) to help develop suitable plans hoping to make the planning process as smooth as possible. Having been very amenable to both views we scaled back our intentions for a house opting for a dormer and through further discussions with the immediate neighbour (no. 13) we pulled back the side extension. Although having a large extension themselves it has become abundantly clear since that any external extensions would be met with objection from this neighbour having constantly dismissed every small part of our plans. Having incurred a fair expense in architectural fees and on version six we submitted the plans. Through further discussions with planning officials we removed the second story element to the front extension, resulting in three roof lines that decrease the more the building moves towards the front of the plot - 54 -

resulting with a property that conforms to all planning development regulations, is architecturally stunning and adds to the already diverse character of the street and surrounding area.

Much to our frustrations after having a recommendation for approval from the planning department we later had to withdraw our application due to a small inaccuracy in the block diagram that put the back of property in-line with number 13, meaning the proposed back extension would protrude 2.3m from the neighbours and not the 1.5m the planner had stated in their report. Although the change has no impact on the 45 degree line used to access impact of light through supplementary planning II and therefore no detrimental impact on the neighbour we decided at the wish of the council to amend and resubmit, further highlighting our wish to work closely with those involved.

It is also worth pointing out that we approached the parish council to discuss our plans but were told they would not comment on our application and were surprised to see an objection when they had previously said they would not be. Through further investigation it became clear that a Parish council meeting had been held where our plans were discussed and strongly opposed by the neighbour (no. 13), although we were not made aware of this platform to put our side across, resulting in somewhat of a bias debate.

Street Scene Properties within Gray Close and the surrounding area benefit from diverse architectural design and with many of them having undergone large side and front extensions the appearance of a defined and symmetrical street scene has been lost over time. In fact the six properties surrounding the end of the cu-de- sac are all different in appearance and size creating a diverse mix of shapes with no consistency or theme. It would be fair to say that most of the properties within the street have had some form of extension over time.

Far from looking out of place within the area our proposal will add to the architectural merits of the close and with the properties within the close sharing no symmetry or direct relationship we feel a dormer will have little impact on its street scene and rural feel. This is further supported through having the eaves height staying the same size and all dormer windows facing away from the close and out of view so from any street view the property will still have the appearance of a bungalow, albeit one that is mostly hidden from sight behind the neighbouring property and various foliage.

Through having a three tiered ridge line that drops by over 2.5m as the property protrudes forward and by most of the larger ridge height being hidden by number 13 there is little impact of closing in the street from the open country views behind. The proposal continues the character of the street by the reduction of ridge height as you move further down the close, enabling it to blend in with the sloping contours of the street aiding to its rural feel. In addition with the front extension being single story and hidden behind a number of trees and hedges within the front of the plot all that would be seen from the street is a section of roof tiles, that through being below the horizon will be softened and therefore will have limited impact on the views and rural feel of the street. Even with these - 55 -

proposals Gray Close will continue to have the best views of the countryside and most open feel than any other of the closes facing countryside along Dowthorpe hill.

Additionally although not immediately prevalent within Gray Close there are other dormer bungalows within the area, one being very similar in Cordon Crescent, with a roof height in excess of 7m and a much steeper roof pitch than our proposal. There is also one closer, just off mill lane, which incidentally we can see from our back garden and plenty of others as you veer off Dowthorpe hill into the surrounding streets.

Size of Development As previously mentioned we are a growing family that was drawn to this plot due to location and plot size, giving us the potential to grow to fit our needs. Also being a cul-de-sac it gives us the perfect and safe location for our children to grow up in and we have been pleasantly surprised on how nice most of the neighbours are and how enthused people are at having a young family within the street once again.

Many of the properties within Gray Close have had large extensions; both the bungalow opposite (no. 18), number 12 and 3 have almost doubled their size with others having large front, side and rear extensions. Our proposal meets the needs of our growing family and due to not only having a large plot but with most of it being hidden from view behind number 13 represents a property that isn’t out of context for the street or the surrounding area and would definitely not look out of place. With such a large plot our proposal will still have one of the largest garden to building ratios within the close and hence could certainly not be classified as an overdevelopment. Large extensions are not just limited to Gray Close, there are numerous examples of large extensions along Dowthorpe hill, many of which with small plot sizes resulting in very small garden to building ratios but still are not classified as overdevelopment of their site (examples include very large extensions of 32 Barker Road 23 Dowthorpe road and 113 Cordon Crescent to name a few).

In addition unlike the immediate neighbour (no.13 – the main objector), who perversely has a large extension themselves we have been mindful with our plans to not add to the congested street parking. Although we do intend to widen the driveway at a later stage the site currently still has more than enough off-road parking spaces for its proposed size, enabling both us and visitors to park.

Effect on neighbouring properties Through working closely with the Borough Council and within planning guidelines our proposal has developed into an extension that we believe has little impact on its neighbouring properties and conforms to all relevant planning guidelines and restrictions. With the contours of the land sloping away from the street our property sinks into to landscape resulting in our property being around 1-1.5m lower than those it backs onto. In addition through having various high trees and hedges within the back gardens and by the fact it’s a dormer, the 7.18m ridge height will quickly drop to 2.2m meaning that views from those backing onto us in Cowper Close with have limited if any change. - 56 -

The largest part of the ridge height is almost completely hidden behind number 13 from the street and with the rear extension going back only 1.5m from our existing line there is no light loss to the neighbouring property and falls within planning guidelines. In addition the eaves height will drop by 180mm than it currently is at the rear (due to change from flat to pitched roof), meaning that when you take into account the ground level difference (370mm) and a standard 6ft fence all of the wall will be hidden from view with only a small amount of roof visible, which will quickly angle away towards the ridge and thus limiting any visual impact. The single story front extension comfortably fits within planning guidelines and by stepping in by 600mm each side reduces the ridge height further, having no impact to first floor views from number 13. In addition if you stand at the corner of where the front extension would be you cannot see either the immediate neighbours living room window or front door, all of which are obscured by established trees and hedges.

Summary Through working closely with the planning department at Wellingborough Council we have developed a proposal that meets our growing family needs and conforms to all relative planning guidelines so therefore has very little impact on the surrounding environment and immediate neighbours. The proposal fits well within its plot size, still enjoying a large garden to building ratio and with many of the properties within Gray Close having undertaken large extensions of varying nature will not look out of place. Both Gray Close and surrounding closes enjoy a wealth of diverse architectural design that creates the character of the area, our proposal far from disrupts this but merely embraces it. The very fact that most of the property will either be hidden behind the neighbouring property or behind trees and hedges with the front of its plot means the impact on the street scene, immediate neighbours and the area is limited.”

ASSESSMENT: Note: As indicated above this application is essentially the same as the withdrawn; therefore the below assessment is largely a repeat of the previous report with relevant alterations.

Impact on Neighbours Amenities There is open agricultural land to the eastern flank of the proposal site; the majority of the additional first floor windows (all of the dormer windows) will therefore overlook fields. Given the separation distances of at least 20m together with various types of screening, including trees, garages and boundary treatments there are not considered to be any overlooking, overshadowing or overbearing impacts towards fronting properties.

With respect to the neighbours to the west in particular no. 13 Gray Close; the increased property height will project further to the rear than the existing and approximately 2.3m further back from the rear wall of no. 13. The light impact towards the rear facing windows of no. 13 is measured against Supplementary Planning Guidance (SPG) II which states that having drawn a 45 degree angle from the middle of the nearest habitable room window this should not be punctuated by a neighbours 2 storey rear extension and if it should then any impact may be considered detrimental. - 57 -

The proposed extension is 0.7m within this tolerance, therefore whilst it is accepted that there may be a degree of light loss to the closest rear window of no. 13 particularly in the mornings as the extension is within the SPG parameters the impact is not considered to be of sufficient detriment to justify refusal. In addition the impact is further lessened by the host property being set on a slightly lower slab level and also the eaves commencing at the ground floor level meaning that the vertical wall of the extension ceases at the first floor and would therefore have less impact than a traditional two storey property might have. Given the acute angling of the extension in relation to the rear windows of no. 13 together with the nature of the roof there is not considered to be any overbearing impact. The same can be said of the impact on the fronting windows, although in this case a 45 and also a 60 (single storey) degree angle line is drawn. The two storey element of the proposal passes the angle test in relation to the nearest front facing window of no. 13 by approximately 0.7m and the ground floor in excess of 2m, therefore together with the drop in levels and the separation distances involved the impact on the light towards the front facing windows of no. 13 is not considered to be to the detriment of those affected rooms. The proposal also involves 3 banks of roof lights in the facing roof to the side elevation, however given that they are to be placed in the pitch of the roof and that they are set towards the front of the property and that there are no windows in the side elevation of no. 13 there are no overlooking implications towards the property of no. 13 or its rear garden.

Finally, with reference to neighbourly impacts; given the separation distances (20m) together with the vegetative northern boundary treatments there are not considered to be any harmful impacts towards the rear elevations of the Cowper Close dwellings or their rear gardens and would be consistent with the existing arrangements of back-to- back properties in the area. In conclusion and having considered the above there are not considered to be any detriment to neighbours amenity either by way of loss of light, privacy or overbearing and is therefore consistent with SPG II and the parts of NNCSS Policy 13 that concern themselves with neighbourly impacts.

Impact on the Appearance and Setting of Area The eastern edge of this part of Earls Barton curving down towards the south is characterised by a number of cul-de-sacs (of which Gray Close is the first) drawing from the distributor road of Dowthorpe Hill with most enjoying a relatively open view of the farm land and the Nene Valley beyond. This is achieved with a limited built form to the ends of the cul-de-sacs together with the last dwellings in each row being a bungalow giving a pleasant openness and sense of its rural surroundings. This character is considered intrinsic to the appearance of the area and should be safeguarded wherever possible.

Gray Close is typical of the above, although much of the symmetry in terms of the built form has been lost though extensions and the gaps between properties have been eroded there does, however, remain a significant visual interaction and a relatively open view with the adjacent farm land. The proposed height of the extensions roof, running roughly in line with the front wall of no. 13, is proposed to be raised to 7.180m from 5m and forward of that a two storey element that is to be 6.163m in height and to the same footprint as the existing and finally a single storey element which is to be set forward of the existing house. The height to the eaves remains as currently exists. The overall height of the property remains less than no. 13 with the highest element to the property being mostly obscured to the street by no. 13 and the lower two storey element only 1m - 58 -

higher than the existing, therefore resulting in minimal loss to the open views. Whilst the additional street scene view is unhelpful insofar as it fails to give a visual representation of the most important scene as approaching from the west it does demonstrate the differing heights of the extensions proposed in relation to its neighbour and thereby how much of the proposal will be screened by no. 13. The front single storey part of the development does represent an encroachment of the built form into the open view, however given its height it will not be above the horizon and therefore will be framed by the background landscape and will be softened by the hedge to the front boundary of the site. It is considered therefore that by stepping the heights of the extension with the lowest part being towards the front that the proposal has resisted the effect of closing in the Close and thereby retains the existing sense of spaciousness. The density remains comparable with the area despite the increase in habitable accommodation and is not considered to have a crammed appearance within the plot.

The existing property has little congruity with no. 13 or other properties in the same row with varying set-backs with front and side extensions introducing variety to the roof- scape and breakages to the architectural symmetry. The property does though have a relationship with the facing dwelling; no. 18 in that they are both bungalows to the same external appearance. Given the drop in levels towards the south, however, they do not have a direct correlation to one another with their likeness not having a particular bearing on the streets character, it is opined that the raising of the roof therefore would not harm the areas existing visual fabric. A visual separation between dwellings is maintained. It is conceded that the expansive roof gives the appearance of the property being top-heavy but as most of the roof will be screened to the street by no. 13 and the height levels drop towards the south there is not considered to be detriment to the street scene. The dormers do not form part of the dwellings street interaction. It is proposed that some of the facia is to be of render, whilst this is not particular prevalent in the vicinity there is a mix of materials used including timber and tiling with some brickwork being retained to the principal elevation, therefore a degree of differing external facing materials is not considered to be deleterious to the street. The site is currently occupied by two trees that have a modicum of visual amenity value, however they are not of such great value to the street to justify special designation and therefore their retention is not protected, in any even one is proposed to be retained.

Finally, due to the dwelling’s position on the boundary with the countryside it is pertinent to give discussion to the visual impact of the extension as viewed from the east. The proposed height of the building whilst it has increased and would include the addition of dormers it would not be higher than the property to the rear and as there is an incline the property is viewed against an urbanised scene and is not considered to be harmful to either the villages character or that of the open countryside as viewed from an easterly direction.

On balance, given the nature of the proposal and the prevailing environmental and situational circumstances the development is not considered to be harmful to the built character of the street and does not harm the areas important openness to the detriment.

Highway Implications Although the size of the property is increasing there remains space for at least 2 vehicles off-road and as there would be no reason to believe that the property would - 59 -

attract any significant increase to automotive movement the parking provision remains acceptable and is not considered to harm the safety and convenience of the local transport network.

Other Considerations The biodiversity is unaffected and the development does not result in an increased potential for crime and the principles of non-discrimination have been followed throughout. There is no detrimental loss to private and important amenity provision associated with the dwelling given the size of the property with 8m length retained.

Response to Representations The comments returned with respect to the impact on neighbour’s amenities, the local highway and impact towards the character and appearance of the street receives discussion above. In addition concerns were raised over problems encountered during construction, whilst there may be a degree of inconvenience this is likely to be for a very minimal period of time and is not considered to be a material planning consideration. Should any future development be planned to the site, as suggested by an objector, and should this require planning permission this will be considered when an application is forthcoming. It has also been suggested that the applicant had not performed a pre- submission consultation exercise with all neighbours; there is no requirement in statute for this to have occurred although it is understood that the applicant did perform such an exercise.

It has also been mentioned that the site notice was placed out side of no. 11 Gray Close, whilst this may be true the notice was placed on the nearest available highway apparatus and clearly stated that no. 15 was the subject of the planning application therefore it is difficult to see how their could be any confusion. Finally, the accuracy of the drawings; it has been suggested that the different scales used makes interpretation difficult, whilst it may be easier to scale from drawings of the same size the scales are clear and accurate making a comparison between the existing and the proposed uncomplicated. The erroneous property numbering has been corrected. The drawings submitted are considered to be of sufficient quality to make a fully informed assessment of the development and its relationship to its surroundings.

With regard the photographs and the script as supplied by the applicant the variances in property types and the erosion of the streetscene by way of property additions is acknowledged and receive mention in the body of the report, however every application is considered on its own merits and it is also worth noting that none are in comparable locations or sites as sensitive as the development site.

Conclusion Having taken into account the above it is considered that the application does not harm the amenities of neighbouring dwellings or detrimental to highway safety and convenience and does not detrimentally impact on the character and appearance of the area in particular its spaciousness and is therefore recommended for approval in accordance with the above planning documents, subject to appropriate conditioning.

RECOMMENDATION: Approval with conditions.

- 60 -

1. The development shall be begun not later than the expiration of three years beginning with the date of this permission. 2. Details of all external facing and roofing materials shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority before the development is commenced. 3. The development shall be constructed in accordance with the amended drawings 12-105-01 Revision D and dated 17 April 2012.

Reasons: 1. Required to be imposed pursuant to S51 of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004. 2. In the interests of amenity. 3. In the interests of clarity.

INFORMATIVE/S Pursuant to Section 38 (6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004, the proposed development complies with the applicable development plan policies and there are no other material considerations that would constitute sustainable grounds for refusal. These include specifically the following policy: Policy 13: General Sustainable Development Principles of the North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy.

- 61 -

BOROUGH COUNCIL OF WELLINGBOROUGH

OTHER BOROUGH

Planning Committee 09/05/2012

Report of the Head of Planning and Development

APPLICATION REF: WP/2012/0068/OB

PROPOSAL: Hybrid Planning Application comprising: Full application for the erection of a home and garden centre, retail units, drive thru restaurant, gatehouse, lakeside visitor centre, restaurants and boat house, together with proposals for access including a lock. Outline: application for the erection of a hotel, creche, leisure club and marina with some matters reserved (appearance). Plus removal of ski slope and associated levelling, landscaping, habitat management and improvement works, vehicular access and servicing proposals together with the provision of car and cycle parking and a bus stop.

LOCATION: Land adjacent Skew Bridge Ski Slope, Northampton Road, Rushden. NN10 6AP

APPLICANT: LXB RP (Rushden) Limited.

The proposal is an East Northamptonshire Council matter and the application is referred to the Planning Committee as a consultee.

PROPOSAL AND DESCRIPTION OF SITE: As described above.

Full planning permission is being sought for the erection of a home and garden centre, retail units(43,289 sq m gross internal floorspace), drive thru restaurant and cafés (1,114 sq m gross internal floorspace), gatehouse, lakeside visitor centre, boathouse, together with proposals for access. Outline planning permission is being sought for the erection of a hotel (112 rooms), crèche and leisure club, with some matters reserved (appearance). The proposal also entails the removal of the ski slope and associated site levelling, landscaping, habitat management and improvement works, vehicular access and servicing proposals together with the provision of car and cycle parking and a bus stop. The scheme as originally submitted also included a lock and marina (for 100 boats), but this has been deleted from the scheme.

This mixed use development is located adjacent to the A45, 2km from Rushden town centre on a site which includes some brownfield land. The development also includes proposals to improve access to the two lakes within the application site area, and provide links to the wider footpath and cycle network along the Nene valley and the adjoining urban areas. The scheme will be accessed from the existing Skew bridge Outfall Weir

WB NORTH Path (um)

R iver Nen e Pat h (um) Co C onst, ED and War d Bdy CR

y R d C B

d r a W ) m d u n (

a h t D a E P

t, ns o C o C Water

Water Water Application Site Boundary

c k Other land under applicant control Water WP/2012/0068/OB

Skew Bridge Ski Lake

Water

5 4 A

Water

ROAD PTO N THAM NOR

Project49.3m Title

5 2

NO RT HA M P T RUSHDEN LAKES, O N

46.0m R OAD NENE VALLEY

5 A 4

Skew Bridge Pipe Line Ski Slopes Client

Water

41.2m Ne e dle a nd Awl LxB RP (Rushden) Ltd.

(P H) D ROA PTO N THAM NOR

B RIN DL EY C LOSE

42.5m Tank Drawing Title

El Sub Sta

5 Ppg Sta A 4 PLAN 1: Gas Valve Compound Supe rstore SITE PLAN El Sub Sta 5

Y A

S U S A Scale Date G E P

Works C R

Motel W A

Y Filling Waste Recycling Station Centre 1:5000 @ A3 19/12/11

Bu llm Ordnance Survey Licence Number: 100020449 at t Bu El si n es s C Playing Field Sub en tre St - 62 -

roundabout; however improvements will be required to take account of the anticipated trips generated by the development and to improve access across the A45 for pedestrians and cyclists.

The development is attempting to strike a balance between; needing to make best overall use of a substantial brownfield development site, being able to deliver an identified and alleged need within a commercially viable scheme, and attempting to avoid any harm to those parts of the site designated SSSI, SPA and Ramsar. The proposed overall objective of the development is to design a scheme which is acceptable in planning terms, commercially viable and respectful of the site’s surrounding landscape character habitats.

In addition to the proposed buildings, 1,300 car parking spaces would be created, along with 126 Sheffield hoop stands which equate to 252 no. cycle spaces. These numbers have been formulated having regard for meeting a balance between demand, need and the principles of encouraging sustainable means of travel. Parking includes suitable provision for disabled and parent/toddler spaces together with trolley bay allocation. Coach and Bus drop-off points are integrated into the designs to allow ease of access. Details of the parking and bus infrastructure are set out in further detail in the Transport Assessment completed by Vectos submitted with the planning application.

The full extent of the application site is 29.8 hectares, however of that area, only 12.5 ha would comprise the area subject to the proposed built development, with the remaining area being located within the SSSI. The siting of the proposed buildings has been designed by the applicant to minimise visual impact and integrate sensitively into their context and landscape. The proposed floor areas have been determined by commercial considerations and the accommodation has been divided into three terraces with a separate garden centre building to reduce the overall impact of the building forms.

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY: WP/2011/0557/OB Replacement of extant planning permission 04/02395/VAR Variation of conditions 1, 3, 5, 12 and 13 of EN/02/00218/OUT in order to submit revised masterplan and allow the phased submission of reserved matters dated 21/01/2005 – This other borough planning application consultation was reported to the Planning Committee on the 4th January 2012, where it was resolved that no objection be raised to the proposal.

NATIONAL AND LOCAL PLANNING POLICY: National and Regional Policy National Policy is contained in the newly published National Planning Policy Framework, paragraphs 23 – 27 deal specifically with ensuring the vitality of town centres. The Framework states that local planning authorities should recognise town centres as the heart of their communities and pursue policies to support their viability and vitality. Local planning authorities should apply a sequential test to planning applications for main town centre uses that are not in an existing centre and are not in accordance with an up-to–date Local Plan. They should require applications for main town centre uses to be located in town centres, then edge of town centres, then edge of centre locations and only if suitable sites are not available should out of centre sites be - 63 - considered. When considering edge of centre and out of centre proposals, preference should be given to accessible sites that are well connected to the town centre. Applicants and local planning authorities should demonstrate flexibility on issues such as format and scale.

When assessing applications for retail, leisure and office development outside of town centres, which are not in accordance with an up-to-date Local Plan, local planning authorities should require an impact assessment if the development is over a proportionate, locally set floorspace threshold (if there is no locally set threshold, the default threshold is 2,500 sq m). This should include assessment of:

• the impact of the proposal on existing, committed and planned public and private investment in a centre or centres in the catchment area of the proposal; and • the impact of the proposal on town centre vitality and viability, including local consumer choice and trade in the town centre and wider area, up to five years from the time the application is made. For major schemes where the full impact will not be realised in five years, the impact should also be assessed up to ten years from the time the application is made.

Where an application fails to satisfy the sequential test or is likely to have significant adverse impact on one or more of the above factors, it should be refused.

Local Policy The relevant local planning policies with which this consultation response report concerns itself with are detailed below.

North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy (CSS) 2008:

• Policy 1: Strengthening the Network of Settlements; • Policy 3: Connecting the Urban Core; • Policy 5: Green Infrastructure; • Policy 6: Infrastructure delivery and developer contributions; • Policy 8: Delivering Economic Prosperity: • Policy 9: Distribution and Location of Development; • Policy 11: Distribution of Jobs: • Policy 12: Distribution of Retail Development • Policy 13: General Sustainable Development Principles; • Policy 14: Energy Efficiency and Sustainable Construction.

Of particular relevance is Policy 12 which seeks to strengthen and regenerate the town centres of Kettering, Corby and Wellingborough as the focus of sustainable communities in North Northamptonshire. It also supports an appropriate scale of development in Rushden that enhances the retail offer of the town centre. Major retail development should not have an adverse impact on the long term vitality and viability on other town centres or the ability of North Northamptonshire to retain expenditure.

SUMMARY OF REPLIES TO CONSULTATIONS/REPRESENTATIONS RECEIVED: 1. Wellingborough BID Limited – ‘I wonder if you could just give me some brief idea of the next steps and time lines with this application as far as any decision BCW will make.’ This representation was forwarded to ENC for consideration. - 64 -

2. Third Party (71 Woodlands Road, Irchester) – objection – ‘More out of town shops will not encourage people to use town centres such as Rushden and Irthlingborough. Town centres must be preserved and utilised more. There are already hotels and garden centres within a 3/4 mile radius of this proposed complex no more are needed. Wild life in this area is good and the disturbance of a complex and or marina would inhibit wildlife.’ This representation was forwarded to ENC for consideration.

3. Wellingborough Chamber – has come out strongly against the development. The Chamber fears that the proposed development of up to 20 high street stores, with the possibility of a large M&S in an out of town location will damage Wellingborough’s town centre beyond repair. It would certainly close the doors on the recently announced M&S ‘Simply Food’ at Castlefields.

It goes against the jointly agreed North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy which supports retail development in town centres and also against national policy which promotes a ‘town centre’ first approach. The recent Mary Portas report on the High Street also confirmed the need to strengthen this policy if town centres are going to continue to thrive and compete against the growing threats of online shopping and existing out of town locations.

The level of footfall and demand in Wellingborough is already very fragile due to the recession and lack of regeneration which has recently occurred. If this goes ahead it would seriously damage all of the work that is starting to happen to promote Wellingborough through the Business Improvement District.

The Chamber wants Wellingborough Council to unequivocally come out and oppose the development to help protect its town centre and support the retailers which are having such a difficult time.

4. BNP Paribas Real Estate on behalf of CBREI, the lessee of the Swansgate Shopping Centre – strongly object to the proposed development on the grounds of the quantum of retail development proposed and its resultant impact on existing centres such as Wellingborough town centre. To illustrate their concerns it is noted that the retail element is some 11% larger than the total capacity of the Swansgate Shopping Centre and is therefore akin to the creation of a new town centre. Being less than 6 miles from Wellingborough Town Centre, the proposed development has the potential to severely undermine the long term future of the Swansgate Shopping Centre to the detriment of future investment and local jobs. The scheme is considered to be contrary to Policy 1 and 12 of the adopted Core Strategy.

In terms of the reported economic benefits of the development, the Council must also consider the significant number of job losses that is likely to be felt in surrounding centres as a direct result of this proposal. Furthermore whilst public transport and cycle sheds are to be provided the nature of the development is such that patrons will undoubtedly be reliant on the car, with considerable impact on the surrounding highway network.

- 65 -

5. Irchester Parish Council – generally in favour of the application however raise concerns regarding the impact of traffic through the villages of Irchester and Little Irchester and also the impact the development would have on the wildlife in the valley and require assurances that this would be addressed.

6. Drivers Jonas Deloitte on behalf of Legal and General owners of Grosvenor Shopping Centre, Northampton; ING Real Estate Investment Management (UK) owners of the Swansgate Shopping Centre, Wellingborough; Ellandi owners of Newlands Shopping Centre, Kettering; and Helical (Corby) Ltd, owners of Corby Town Centre and Willow Place, Corby – the scale of retail floorspace is of regional significance and therefore should be planned for through the plan making process and be directed primarily to the regional town centres. The adopted and emerging development policy does not identify Rushden as an upper tier settlement or service centre.

The assumptions made in calculating the construction and operational phase employment impact of the Rushden Lakes development will have led to an overestimation of the number of jobs and additional expenditure created. In addition, the report does not state in a transparent manner, the assumptions made in respect of the displacement of jobs from elsewhere in the region to fill the employment opportunities in the new development.

The cumulative impacts of between 12% and 22% on Northampton, Kettering, Corby and Wellingborough Town Centres would result in significant adverse impacts upon the trade/turnover of the centres and upon the existing and planned private investment within them. For this reason, the Rushden Lakes proposal conflicts with the impact tests of Paragraph 26 of the National Planning Policy Framework. Paragraph 27 of the NPPF then goes on to advise LPAs that where a planning application is likely to have a significant adverse impact upon a defined centre it should be refused. The Rushden Lakes proposals are likely to have a significant adverse impact upon all four of the key Town Centres within Northamptonshire. The proposals are therefore wholly contrary to policy.

No further consultation undertaken as this is an ‘other borough’ planning application consultation only.

ASSESSMENT: The material planning considerations are:

• Compliance with policy; • Retail Impact • Economic impact • Other material planning matters.

Compliance with (local) policy The determining planning authority should have regard to CSS policies 1, 3, 6, 8, 9, 11, 12, 13 and 14.

Retail Impact In January 2012, GVA was instructed by the North Northamptonshire Joint Planning Unit (JPU) on behalf of the partner planning authorities to undertake a review of the - 66 -

retail evidence to inform the review of the Core Strategy, but also to review the proposals for Rushden Lakes and assess whether it was likely to complement or adversely impact on the strategy and the overall vitality and viability of the North Northamptonshire towns. The brief was agreed through the Chief Planning Officers and Chief Executives. The report represents an independent assessment by a market leading planning, development and regeneration team. Comments on the retail impact are derived from this independent study. A copy of the report is available on the JPU website: http://www.nnjpu.org.uk/publications/docdetail.asp?docid=1244

Need/Capacity Issues There is no policy requirement for the applicant to demonstrate a need for the scale of retail and other town centre uses proposed at Rushden Lakes, however the accompanying Practice Guide to PPS4 recognises that need is a material consideration to the application of the sequential approach, and to the consideration of impact.

The scale of additional comparison retail floorspace proposed, at 26,746sqm is similar to the total global comparison goods capacity identified within the North Northamptonshire area up to 2021 based on the latest RTP Study. The GVA report suggests that these forecasts may be overstated due to further deterioration in consumer spending. On this basis, the consequence of permitting the current Rushden Lakes proposals would be to absorb all the identified expenditure capacity within the North Northamptonshire area for the next 10 years.

In accordance with the adopted Core Strategy and National Planning Policy, this need is currently intended to be met within the town centres of Kettering, Corby and Wellingborough. The consequence of this, in policy terms, would therefore be a redistribution of current market share away from the defined town centres, to an out-of- centre location. This would be contrary to the Core Strategy, and the National Planning Policy Framework. The adopted Wellingborough Town Centre Area Action Plan (WTCAAP) identifies additional retail capacity to meet the needs identified in the Core Strategy, if the Rushden Lakes proposal goes forward, this is likely to undermine this Council’s ability to deliver the proposals in this plan, which seeks to improve and expand the retail offer in Wellingborough Town Centre.

From GVA’s analysis it is evident that, based on Rushden’s current market share, the level of retained expenditure growth in the period up to 2020 or 2031 is insufficient to support the scale of additional comparison retail floorspace proposed. It would be feasible to increase the share of spend retained in the Rushden zone, but this would result in reducing the market share of the defined North Northamptonshire centres, which policy seeks to sustain.

Whilst the Rushden Lakes proposal would bring significant additional choice of comparison retail shopping closer to the existing residents of Rushden, they would form only a small part of its customer base. The Core Strategy identifies a network of centres, where growth is to be focused in order to provide choice and improved retailing facilities in sustainable locations. Given the more limited capacity and demand anticipated, the benefits of improved choice for those living close to the scheme need to be balanced against the adverse impact on existing centres and the planned investment intended to provide more choice and better quality retailing in the town centres, such as Wellingborough. - 67 -

The Sequential Approach GVA considers that the proposal’s catchment is likely to extend across the combined North Northamptonshire catchment area and beyond (up to a 30 minute drive). The applicant’s assumption therefore that 70% of the scheme’s turnover will be derived from zone 10 (based on Rushden and Raunds) is considered unrealistic. It is also considered to be contradicting the expectations of the developer to have visits in access of 2.5m. The applicant’s supporting statement gives limited consideration to the sequential approach, and is deficient in that it only considers sites within or on the edge of Rushden town centre. There is significant development potential within and on the edge of the centres of Wellingborough, Kettering and Corby which should be included. The applicant has therefore failed to demonstrate compliance with the sequential approach, and the proposals are therefore contrary to the National Planning Policy Framework and the Core Strategy.

Impact Considerations The GVA study concludes that the applicant’s retail impact is deficient in a number of respects. They consider that it is likely to have underestimated the potential turnover of the Rushden Lakes scheme and underestimated the impact, including cumulative impact on nearby town centres. The proposal is likely to lead to a significant cumulative impact on a number of centres, notably Wellingborough and Kettering and they are concerned that the development could potentially prejudice planned investment in Kettering, Wellingborough, Northampton and potentially Corby (see objections above).

The applicant’s assessment estimates the scheme will achieve a total comparison goods turnover of £83 million in 2016. This implies an average turnover of £3,103 per sq m. To put this in context the analysis suggests that Rushden Town Centre comparison retailers are already trading at in excess of £5,000 per sq m and the comparison retailers in the other three North Northamptonshire Centres are all trading at turnovers in excess of £6,000 per sq m. GVA suggest a more realistic estimate of average sales per sq m at 2016 would be circa £5,500 per sq m. On this basis the expectation would be that the scheme could achieve a total comparison goods turnover of up to £147 million i.e. 77% higher than the turnover modelled by the applicant.

The GVA suggests the following cumulative retail impact analysis:

- 68 -

In practice the precise impact would depend on the type of retailers represented and the extent to which they compete with the existing and potential offer in the town centres. For example a fashion park targeting mainstream multiple retailers would be likely to have a larger impact on ‘higher order’ centres like Northampton and a lesser impact on Wellingborough town centre. This does not, however, affect the conclusion that the impact on the town centre and importantly its future potential, is likely to be significant. Should the Rushden Lakes scheme go ahead Wellingborough would find it even more difficult to find investors willing to take on long over due improvements to its existing retail offer which members of this council have identified as a priority.

The GVA report does not consider that the garden centre element or very limited ancillary retailing linked to the proposed leisure attractions are likely to give rise to any significant policy issues. The development, however, of a hotel at the Rushden Lakes scheme would be likely to compete for operator demand with nearby centres including Wellingborough where there is a town centre opportunity identified for a hotel within the High Street/Jacksons Lane site.

These proposals are contrary to the adopted development plan and the National Planning Policy Framework and will clearly have an impact on the viability of future investment in Wellingborough Town Centre.

Economic Impact The applicant estimates that over 1550 new permanent direct FTE jobs will be created as a result of the development

As referred to above in the retail assessment, there is only a limited amount of retail expenditure capacity and this is under threat not because of economic issues but the increase in online shopping. There is therefore a finite level of retail related jobs. The consequence of the Rushden Lakes proposal would be to divert these jobs which would have occurred in the town centres of Wellingborough, Kettering and Corby to this location. The same is likely to be true of many of the construction jobs as schemes within the town centres, such as the Church Street/ Market Street schemes in the Wellingborough Town Centre AAP would be at risk. Jobs could also be potentially lost - 69 -

from existing town centres if the retail spend in town centres reduces.These therefore are not likely to all be additional jobs, but represent a displacement of jobs from the town centres with the new jobs being predominantly related to the leisure facilities.

Highway Considerations ENC must ensure that appropriate highway assessments are made and that sufficient improvements are proposed. These should take full account of the likely potential visitors based on the expected catchment of the site and not have a detrimental impact on the road network, in particular the A45. Improvements should not necessarily be limited to the Skew Bridge roundabout.

Other material planning matters Other material planning matters that ENC should endeavour to explore during their consultation exercise with the relevant consultees prior to determining this application are considered to be:

• Visual impact upon the landscape • Impact upon the SSSI and SPA • Crime and disorder • Biodiversity and Green Infrastructure • Traffic, Access and Highway Safety

Conclusion

RECOMMENDATION: That the Borough Council object to the application on the basis that it would have an adverse impact on Wellingborough Town Centre and would detrimentally affect the ability of the Council to deliver the aspirations in the adopted Wellingborough Town Centre Area Action Plan.

The applicant has failed to adopt a sequential approach and the significant impact likely to arise as a consequence of the application is considered to be contrary to the National Planning Policy Framework and Policies 1 and 12 of the North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy. On this basis the application should be refused.

Notwithstanding this strong objection, should East Northamptonshire Council be minded to approve the application the Council request that the application be restricted to minimise the potential impact on Wellingborough town centre by:

• Not approving an open A1 consent, but restricting the uses to a Garden Centre and home and garden related uses and other bulky goods. In particular restricting the ability to sell food and drink, books, stationery, handbags and luggage, jewellery, perfume, toiletries, fashion, clothing and footwear, as these uses should be located in a town centre. • Placing a condition to ensure a minimum unit size of 10,000 sq ft. • Requiring the S106 to contribute to mitigation measures for Wellingborough Town centre. • Requiring improved public transport from Wellingborough.

- 70 -

In addition the scheme should make provision for:

• improved footpath and cycle access along the Nene valley, in particular including links to Chester Farm and the proposed development at Wellingborough East (Stanton Cross). • Training and apprenticeships.

- 71 -

BOROUGH COUNCIL OF WELLINGBOROUGH

FOR INFORMATION

Planning Committee 09/05/2012

Report of the Head of Planning and Development

APPLICATION REF: WP/2011/0108/OB

PROPOSAL: Installation of 1 no. single wind turbine with a maximum height to tip of 66m, new access track, crane hardstanding, transformer cubicle and substation. Additional information submitted (September 2011).

LOCATION: Arable field at Cranford.

APPLICANT: Cranford Management Limited.

NOTE: Approved by Kettering Borough Council on 30th March 2012.

1. The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of 3 years from the date of this planning permission.

REASON: To comply with Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended) and to prevent an accumulation of unimplemented planning permissions.

2. The Local Planning Authority shall be notified in writing of the date when electricity from the development is first supplied to the grid and, other than any temporary construction compound(s), the development hereby permitted shall be removed from the site following the expiry of 25 years from that date: the turbine shall be decommissioned and the turbine and all related above-ground structures shall be removed from the site. Following the removal of the turbine and structures, the land shall be re-instated in accordance with a Decommissioning Method Statement that shall first be submitted for the approval of the Local Planning Authority at least 18 months before the date of the decommissioning of the turbine. That method statement shall include details of the manner, management and timing of the re-instatement works to be undertaken and shall be accompanied by a Traffic Management Plan for the removal of the turbine components. The removal works and the reinstatement of the site shall not be carried out other than in accordance with the approved scheme.

REASON: In recognition of the expected life of the proposal and to prevent an unacceptable impact on the landscape and the surrounding environment in accordance with PPS5, PPG13, policy 25 and 26 of the East Midlands Regional Plan and policy 13 of the North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy.

WP/2011/0108/OB - 72 -

3. Notwithstanding the submitted information and before the erection of the wind turbine, details of its exact siting, design, specification and colour shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Only the approved wind turbine shall be installed upon the development site and the turbine shall not bear any logos or other forms of advertisement.

REASON: To ensure the proposal does not have a detrimental impact on quality of life or the natural environment in accordance with PPS1, PPS22, PPG24 and policy 13 of the North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy.

4. The planning permission extends to the provision of 1 turbine only. The blade tip height of the turbine shall not exceed 66 metres in height above ground level and the hub height shall not exceed 49.04 metres in height above ground level.

REASON: In the interests of protecting the natural environment and to minimise visual impact in accordance with PPS1, PPS22, policies 26 and 27 of the East Midlands Regional Plan and policy 13 of the North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy.

5. Any lighting associated with the construction and operation of the wind farm shall only be installed and used in accordance with a scheme that has first been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority before the commencement of development.

6. All cabling shall be laid underground in accordance with a scheme to be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority prior to installation.

7. No development shall commence on site until details of the types and colours of all external facing and roofing materials to be used, together with samples, for the transformer box and substation have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall not be carried out other than in accordance with the approved details.

REASON: In the interests of the visual amenities of the area in accordance with policy 13 of the North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy.

8. No development shall take place until details of the proposed surface material to be used in construction of the proposed access track have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall not be carried out other than in accordance with the approved details.

- 73 -

REASON: In the interests if highway safety and the visual amenity of the area in accordance with policy 13 of the North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy.

9. The Local Planning Authority shall be notified in writing if the wind turbine fails to produce electricity for supply to the electricity grid for a continuous period of 12 months. The wind turbine and its associated ancillary equipment shall be removed from the site within a period of 6 months from the end of that 12 month period, in accordance with a scheme that has first been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. That scheme shall include the details of the manner, management and timing of the works to be undertaken and shall also include a traffic management plan for the removal of the turbine components. The site shall be restored in accordance with a detailed scheme that has first been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority within 2 months of removing the turbine.

REASON: In recognition of the expected life of the proposal and to prevent an unacceptable impact on the landscaoe and the surrounding environment in accordance with PPS5, PPG13, policy 25 and 26 of the East Midlands Regional Plan and policy 13 of the North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy.

10. No development shall take place until a baseline television reception study in the area (5km radius from the turbine) has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The study shall include a mitigation scheme setting out details of works necessary to mitigate any adverse effects to domestic television signals in the area caused by the development and shall include provision for investigating and dealing with any claim by any person for domestic loss or interference at their household within 12 months of the final commissioning of the wind turbine. The development shall not be operated other than in accordance with the approved study and mitigation scheme.

REASON: In the interests of protecting local amenity and to alleviate any adverse electromagnetic interference in accordance with Policy 13 of the North Northamptonshire Core Strategy.

11. Prior to the commencement of development, a scheme for aviation lighting for the turbine shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The turbine shall not be brought into use unless or until the approved lighting scheme has been implemented in full.

REASON: In the interests of air safety in accordance with PPG13. The MOD have advised that the turbine should be fitted with 25 candela omni-directional red lighting or infrared lighting with an optimised flash pattern of 60 flashes per minute of 200ms - 500ms duration at the highest practicable point.

12. No development shall take place until details of the siting, design, materials and finish for all enclosures and boundary treatments to be erected have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall not be carried out other than in accordance with the approved details.

- 74 -

REASON: To protect the visual amenity of the area in accordance with policy 13 of the North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy.

13. No development shall be undertaken other than in accordance with the recommendations, mitigation and enhancements measures set out within the submitted Ecology Report (September 2010). Prior to the commencement of development a detailed tree and hedgerow enhancement scheme shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The scheme shall include details of the proposed species, planting sizes, spacing and numbers of trees and shrubs to be planted. The approved scheme shall be carried out in the first planting and seeding seasons following first operation of the turbine. Any trees or plants which, within a period of 5 years from the date of planting, die, are removed or become seriously damaged or diseased shall be replaced in the next planting season with others of similar size and species.

REASON: In the interests of wildlife and habitat in accordance with PPS9 and policies 5 and 13 of the North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy.

14. No development shall commence unless and until a specification/specific details of the wind turbine to be installed and its exact position within the site have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Where the turbine is not a 330kW Enercon E33 wind turbine a full update of the Environmental Noise Impact Assessment shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall not be carried out other than in accordance with the approved details. Notwithstanding the provisions of Article 3 of the Town and Country Planning (General permitted Development) Order 1995 (or as amended) no further wind turbines other than those specified shall be installed on the site, under or in accordance with Part 8 of the Schedule to that Order, without a separate planning permission from the Local Planning Authority.

REASON: In the interests of protecting residential amenity in accordance with Policy 13 of the North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy.

15. The noise emitted from the wind turbine as measured in accordance with the guidelines stated within ETSU-R-97, at any dwelling in existence (at the time of this permission) not associated with the scheme, shall not exceed 35 dBLA90, 10 minutes at wind speeds within the site not exceeding 10 metres per second. The measurements and or calculations shall be made in accordance with the methodology detailed in ETSU-R-97 The assessment and rating of noise from wind farms, in particular the noise emission values for the wind turbine shall include the addition for any tonal penalty as recommended in the same document.

REASON: In the interests of protecting residential amenity in accordance with Policy 13 of the North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy.

16. The noise emitted from the wind turbine as measured in accordance with the guidelines stated within ETSU-R-97, at any dwelling in existence (at the time of this permission) associated with the scheme, shall not exceed 45 dBLA90, 10 - 75 -

minutes at wind speeds within the site not exceeding 10 metres per second. The measurements and or calculations shall be made in accordance with the methodology detailed in ETSU-R-97 The assessment and rating of noise from wind farms, in particular the noise emission values for the wind turbine shall include the addition for any tonal penalty as recommended in the same document.

REASON: In the interests of protecting residential amenity in accordance with Policy 13 of the North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy.

If planning permission has been granted, the justification for that decision is set out below:-

The proposal is in accordance with national and local policies as set out in Planning Policy Statements/Guidance Notes 1, 5, 7, 9, 23, 24 and 25, Policies 24, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 35 and 40 of The East Midlands Regional Plan, Policies 5, 13 and 14 of the North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy and Policy 7 of the Local Plan for Kettering Borough. Whilst a number of material planning considerations have been raised, in reaching the decision to approve the proposal, these have been carefully weighed against all relevant policy considerations.

- 76 -

BOROUGH COUNCIL OF WELLINGBOROUGH

FOR INFORMATION

Planning Committee 09/05/2012

Report of the Head of Planning and Development

APPLICATION REF: WP/2011/0406/OB

PROPOSAL: Erection of 5 no. wind turbines (100m high to the tip of a rotor blade in a vertical position). Provision of crane hard standings, control building, substation, underground cabling, temporary construction compound, widening of the existing site access, new site access tracks and permanent 65m high anemometer mast.

LOCATION: Land at Glendon Farm, Nr Burton Latimer.

APPLICANT: Mr Lindlahr, Infinergy Limited.

NOTE: Approved by Kettering Borough Council on 2nd April 2012.

KETTERING BOROUGH COUNCIL, having considered a valid application submitted on 24 August 2011, for the above development in pursuance of their powers under the above mentioned Acts, with the following justification, that:-

The proposal is submitted with an Environmental Statement and is significantly in accordance with the criteria, aims and objectives of national and local policies as set out in Planning Policy Statements/Guidance Notes 1, 22, 7, 9, 13, 5, 24, and 25, Policies 24, 26, 27, 29, and 40 of The East Midlands Regional Plan, Policies 5, 13 and 14 of the North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy and Policy 7 of the Local Plan for Kettering Borough. The issues relating to the visual impact on the landscape, historical environment, noise, shadow flicker, ecology, and all other matters not specifically mentioned are material planning considerations have been mitigated where appropriate to acceptable levels by planning conditions and, in reaching the decision to approve the proposal, have been carefully weighed against all relevant policy considerations GRANT PERMISSION for the development as described and in accordance with the application and plans submitted, subject to the following conditions:-

1. The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of 5 years from the date of this planning permission.

REASON: To comply with Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended) and to prevent an accumulation of unimplemented planning permissions.

Figure 6580/001 Red Line Application Location Plan

Legend: Planning Application Boundary showing micro-siting allowance !> Turbine Location Access Tracks Crane Pad Laydown Area Construction Compound (44.5m x 19.5m) Substation (33.5m x 30m)

Met Mast Foundation !U Met Mast Proposed screening Swale (4m wide, 1m deep) Culvert below Tracks Infiltration Drain (200mm - 300mm wide) !> 1

!> WP/2011/0406/OB

Title: Red Line Application !> 4 Location Plan

!U Project: Burton Wold Wind Farm South !> 3

Source: NOTE – Reproduced from the Ordnance Survey Map with the permission of the Controller of H.M.Stationery Office. © Crown copyright licence number 150000079 or 00031673 Infinergy Ltd. • RGB Aerial Photography – ©GeoPerspectives

Client: Infinergy

!> 5 Drawn by: Checked by: MP VC

Date: Figure: Mar 2011 6580/001

Scale:1:5,000 @ A3 Revision No. 0 50 100 m - Path: O:\6580b Burton Wold Wind Farm South\Tech\GIS\MXD\Planning Figures\6580D_113022MP_Planning_Application_Boundary.mxd

Environmental Statement - Burton Wold Wind Farm South Figure 6580/001 - 77 -

2. The Local Planning Authority shall be notified in writing of the date when electricity from the development is first supplied to the grid and the development shall be removed from the site following the expiry of 25 years from that date: the turbines shall be decommissioned and the turbines and all related above-ground structures shall be removed from the site. Following the removal of the turbines and structures, the land shall be re-instated in accordance with a Decommissioning Method Statement that shall first be submitted for the approval of the Local Planning Authority at least 18 months before the date of the decommissioning of the wind farm. That method statement shall include details of the manner, management and timing of the re-instatement works to be undertaken and shall be accompanied by a Traffic Management Plan for the removal of the large turbine components. The removal works and the reinstatement of the site shall not be carried out other than in accordance with the approved scheme.

REASON: In recognition of the expected life of the proposal and to prevent an unacceptable impact on the landscape and the surrounding environment in accordance with PPG13, and policy 13 of the North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy.

3. Prior to the erection of any wind turbines, details of their exact siting locations, design, specification and colour shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. Only turbine locations as approved shall be installed upon the development site.

REASON: To ensure the proposal does not have a detrimental impact on quality of life or the natural environment in accordance with PPS1, PPS22, and policy 13 of the North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy.

4. The blade tip height of the turbines shall not exceed 100 metres in height above ground level and the hub height shall not exceed 65 metres in height above ground level. The blades of the turbines hereby permitted shall all rotate in the same direction. The anemometer mast shall not exceed 65 metres in height above ground level.

REASON: In the interests of protecting the natural environment and to minimise visual impact in accordance with PPS1, PPS22, and policy 13 of the North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy.

5. Any lighting associated with the construction and operation of the wind farm shall only be installed and used in accordance with a scheme that has first been submitted to and approved in writing with the local planning authority before the commencement of development.

REASON: In the interests of protecting the natural environment and to minimise visual impact in accordance with PPS1, PPS22, and policy 13 of the North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy.

6. All cabling shall be laid underground in accordance with a scheme to be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority prior to installation. - 78 -

REASON: In the interests of protecting the natural environment and to minimise visual impact in accordance with PPS1, PPS22, policies 26 and 27 of the East Midlands Regional Plan and policy 130fthe North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy.

7. No development shall commence on site until details of the types and colours of all external facing and roofing materials to be used, together with samples to the substation have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall not be carried out other than in accordance with the approved details.

REASON: In the interests of the visual amenities of the area in accordance with policy 13 of the North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy.

8. The local planning authority shall be notified in writing of any wind turbine that fails to produce electricity for supply to the electricity grid for a continuous period of 12 months. This wind turbine and its associated ancillary equipment shall be removed from the site within a period of 6 months from the end of that 12 month period, in accordance with a scheme that has first been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. That scheme shall include the details of the manner, management and timing of the works to be undertaken and shall also include a traffic management plan for the removal of the large turbine components. That part of the site shall be restored in accordance with a detailed scheme that has first been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority.

REASON: In recognition of the expected life of the proposal and to prevent an unnecessary impact on the landscape and the surrounding environment in accordance with policy 25 and 26 of the East Midlands Regional Plan and policy 13 of the North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy.

9. No development shall begin until a baseline television reception study in the area has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The study shall include a mitigation scheme setting out details of works necessary to mitigate any adverse effects to domestic television signals in the area caused by the development and shall include provision for investigating and dealing with any claim by any person for domestic loss or interference at their household within 12 months of the final commissioning of the wind farm. The development shall not be operated other than in accordance with the approved study and mitigation scheme.

REASON: In the interests of protecting the local amenity and to alleviate any adverse electromagnetic interference in accordance with Policy 13 of the North Northamptonshire Core Strategy.

10. No development shall commence unless and until a scheme to mitigate against shadow flicker which shall include a computerised control system designed to shut down turbines at relevant times has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The turbines shall not operate other than in accordance with the approved scheme. - 79 -

REASON: In the interests of protecting residential amenity in the accordance with Policy 13 of the North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy.

11. Prior to commencement of development details of advance highway warning signs shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The details to be approved shall include the size, location and the wording/symbols to be displayed on them. The approved signs warning highways users of their approach to the site access shall be erected at the approved locations prior to the development commencing and remain in place for the duration of the construction of the wind farm.

REASON: In the interests of highway safety in accordance with policy 13 of the North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy.

12. Prior to the commencement of the development hereby permitted a Construction and Traffic Management Plan shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The Construction and Traffic Management Plan shall include:- a) The number, nature and route of all construction related vehicles which would be used to transport the constituent parts of the turbines. b) Details and measures of how the route identified under part (a) of this condition would be enforced including measures and actions for non compliance. c) Details of how any damage to the highway along the route identified under part (a) of this condition shall be determined and repaired. d) Swept path details of all vehicles identified under part (a) of this condition at all affected junctions along the route identified under part (a) of this condition. Details required shall include topographical surveys of affected junctions including works required to accommodate the vehicles identified under part (a) of this condition. e) Detailed highway condition survey of the route identified under part (a) of this condition.

REASON: In the interests of highway safety in accordance with PPG13 and Policy 13 of the North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy.

13. Prior to the commencement of any other development hereby permitted all highway works identified by the Construction and Traffic Management Plan shall be completed and shall, thereafter be maintained for the duration of the construction and commissioning of all of the turbines. Any such works shall thereafter be removed and the highway reinstated in accordance with details that shall first be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority unless otherwise approved in writing by the local planning authority.

REASON: In the interests of of highway safety in accordance with PPG13 and policy 13 of the North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy.

14. Prior to the commencement of the development hereby permitted details of the location, layout, access, signing and security of the public viewing area shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Such - 80 -

details as may be approved shall thereafter be constructed and made available for the public and maintained in good order for the duration of the construction of all of the turbines and for a minimum period of six months after commissioning of the last turbine.

REASON: In the interests of highway safety in accordance with PPG13 and policy 13 of the North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy.

15. Prior to the commencement of development, a scheme for aviation lighting of the turbines shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Development shall not be carried out or operated other than in accordance with the approved scheme.

REASON: In the interests of air safety in accordance with PPG13. The MOD have advised that all turbines shall be fitted with infra-red lighting at the highest practicable point.

16. No development shall take place on site until a scheme for boundary treatment has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The wind farm shall not be operational until the approved scheme has been fully implemented in accordance with the approved details, and shall be retained thereafter.

REASON: In the interests of the interests .of security and the amenity of the area in accordance with policy 13 of the North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy.

17. Within six months prior to the commencement date of development, a further detailed survey for bats and red kites, including any further identified mitigation measures shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Development, including mitigation measures, shall not be carried out other than in accordance with the approved surveys.

REASON: In the interests of bats and red kites on or near the site in accordance with PPS9.

18. Prior to the commencement of development details of a scheme for the provision of a septic tank for the building shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall not be carried out other than in accordance with the approved scheme.

REASON: To prevent pollution of the water environment in accordance with PPS25, policy 35 of the East Midlands Regional Plan and policy 13(q) of the North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy.

19. The development shall not commence unless and until an Ecological Management Plan (EMP) relating to short and long term monitoring and management of the whole of the development site, has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Thereafter the EMP shall be - 81 -

implemented and all work shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.

REASON: in the interests of maintaining and improving habitats, biodiversity and the nature conservation value of the site and its surroundings in accordance with PPS9 and Policy 13 of the North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy.

20. Prior to the commencement of development, a groundwater survey shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Development shall not be carried out other than in accordance with the approved survey.

REASON: In the interests of maintaining and improving habitats, biodiversity and the natural conservation value of the site and its surroundings in accordance with PPS9 and policy 13 of the North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy.

21. Prior to the commencement of development, details of the bunded structures for the storage of chemicals, oils and fuels shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Development shall not be carried out other than in accordance with the approved details.

REASON: In the interests of maintaining and improving habitats, biodiversity and the natural environment value of the site and its surroundings in accordance with policy 13 of the North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy.

22. No development shall commence on site until details of proposed post construction monitoring surveys in respect of impact on bats and red kites has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The use of the site shall not operate other than in accordance with the approved surveys.

REASON: In the interests of biodiversity in accordance with PPS9 and Policy 13 of the North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy.

23. No development shall take place unless and until a Construction Environment Management Plan, which shall also include details of proposed hedgerow enhancements and provision of owl boxes, has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

REASON: In the interest of biodiversity in accordance with PPS9 and Policy 13 of the North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy.

24 No development shall commence on site unless and until a scheme for the provision and maintenance of the surface water drainage of the site based on sustainable drainage principles and an assessment of the hydrological and hydrogeological context of the development, has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall not be carried out other than in accordance with the approved scheme.

- 82 -

REASON: To prevent flood risk by ensuring satisfactory storage/disposal of surface water from the site in accordance with Policy 13 of the North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy.

25. No development shall be carried out on site other than in accordance with a detailed programme of proposed archaeological investigation and recording, which shall have been first submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

REASON: In the interest of the historic environment in accordance with PPS5 and Policy 13 of the North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy.

26. Prior to the commencement of development final details of the wind turbines to be installed and their exact position( s) within the site shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Where the turbines are not 2.3 MW Enercon E70 wind turbines a full update of the noise assessment, as contained in the Environmental Statement shall be submitted. Notwithstanding the provisions of Article 3 of the Town and Country Planning (General permitted Development) Order 1995 (or as amended) no further wind turbines other than those specified shall be installed on the site, under or in accordance with Part 8 of the Schedule to that Order, without a separate planning permission from the Local Planning Authority.

REASON: In the interests of protecting the occupiers of nearby dwellings in accordance with Policy 13 of the North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy.

27. The noise emitted from the combined effects of all the wind turbines as measured in accordance with the guidelines stated within ETSU-R-97, at any dwelling in existence (at the time of this permission) not associated with the scheme, shall not exceed the greater of 35 dBLA90, 10 minutes or 5 dBA above background noise (LA90, 10 minutes) at wind speeds within the site not exceeding 10 metres per second for day time periods and shall not exceed the greater of 43 dBLA90, 10 minutes or 5 dBA above background noise (LA90, 10 minutes) at wind speeds within the site not exceeding 10 metres per second for night time periods. The measurements and or calculations shall be made in accordance with the methodology detailed in ETSU-R-97 The assessment and rating of noise from wind farms, in particular the noise emission values for the wind turbines shall include the addition for any tonal penalty as recommended in the same document. The background noise levels shall be those measured and stated within the Burton Wold Wind Farm South, Environment Statement - Chapter 9 Noise and Vibration Assessment, dated April 2011.

REASON: In the interests of protecting the occupiers of nearby dwellings in accordance with Policy 13 of the North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy.

28. Prior to development commencing, a scheme detailing the methodology for the monitoring of noise emitted from the use hereby approved shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The scheme shall. Ensure that (a) person(s) agreed by the Local Planning Authority to be suitably competent, shall carry out noise monitoring at the nearest noise sensitive - 83 -

premises outside the curtilage of the development, or other location agreed prior to monitoring with the Local Planning Authority, to ensure compliance with condition 26.

The monitoring required shall be carried out within three months of the commissioning of the turbines, and thereafter at least once every twelve months, and at other times in response to notification by the Local Planning Authority that a complaint has been received relating to noise emissions from the wind turbines.

Within one month of any of the above monitoring or modelling, a report detailing the results of noise monitoring or modelling shall be submitted to the Local Planning Authority.

REASON: In the interests of protecting the occupiers of nearby dwellings in accordance with Policy 13 of the North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy.

29. No construction shall be undertaken as part of this development except in accordance with the noise and vibration assessment and mitigation contained within the Burton WoId Wind Farm South, Environment Statement- Chapter 9 Noise and Vibration Assessment, dated April 2011.

REASON: In the interests of protecting the occupiers of nearby dwellings in accordance with Policy 13 of the North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy.

30. All construction works and ancillary operations which are audible at the site boundary shall be carried out only between the hours of 07:30 and 19:00 Mondays to Fridays and between the hours of 08:00 and 13:00 on Saturdays and at no times on Sundays and Bank Holidays, without the prior approval of the Local Planning Authority and the completion of any additional measures required by the Local Planning Authority in permitting construction outside the hours specified in this condition.

REASON: In the interests of protecting the occupiers of nearby dwellings in accordance with Policy 13 of the North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy.

31. No works to decommission the development shall commence until a scheme for the protection of nearby residential dwellings, both outside and within the development curtilage, from noise resulting from the decommissioning of the wind turbine farm, has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. All works which form part of the scheme shall be completed before the commencement of the decommissioning of the wind farm.

REASON: In the interests of protecting the occupiers of nearby dwellings in accordance with Policy 13 of the North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy.

Notes (if any):- 1. No works shall commence within the public highway without the express written consent of the local Highway Authority. Such consent would only be forthcoming subject to the completion of Agreements under Section 59 and section 278 of the - 84 -

Highways Act 1980. Any works within the highway shall comply with NCC Highways specifications.

2. The Applicant is advised to gain the agreement of the local highway authority to the Construction and Traffic Management Plan and the public site viewing area prior to their submission to the local planning authority for the discharge of the associated conditions.

3. The Ministry of Defence have been consulted and advised that they must be informed of the date construction starts and ends, the maximum height of construction equipment and the latitude and longitude of every turbine.

Western Power Distribution (East Midlands) plc has a network within the site and must be notified in detail about any alteration, building or ground works proposed in the vicinity of their network that mayor may not directly affect cables.

4. The applicant is advised to contact the Area 7 Abnormal Loads officer to discuss the route by which the turbines will be transported to the site on 01623 886717 or [email protected]

5. Pursuant to condition 28, the measurement or noise emissions from the wind turbine (inclusive of existing background noise) shall use an LA90 index over a minimum of 20 periods each of 10 minutes duration, at varying wind speeds across the operational range of the wind turbines at the location hereby approved. Measurement of noise emissions shall be made in consecutive 10 minute periods provided that they fall within the wind speed defined in this clause. The measurements and or calculations shall be made in accordance with the methodology detailed in ET8U-R-97 The assessment and rating of noise from wind farms.

- 85 -

BOROUGH COUNCIL OF WELLINGBOROUGH

FOR INFORMATION

Planning Committee 09/05/2012

Report of the Head of Planning and Development

APPLICATION REF: WP/2012/0008/C

PROPOSAL: Erection of a new industrial building, plant and machinery and installation of a biomass fuelled power plant.

LOCATION: (Larner Pallets) 3 4 Bevan Close, Wellingborough. NN8 4BL

APPLICANT: Mr David McEwan, Larner Timber Recycling Limited.

NOTE: Approved by Northamptonshire County Council on 21st March 2012 subject to the following condition/s:-

Commencement

1. The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiry of five years from the date of this permission. Written notification of the date of commencement shall be sent to the Waste Planning Authority within 7 days of such commencement

Reason: To comply with Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, as amended by the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004.

Scope of the Planning Permission

2. Unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Waste Planning Authority and except as otherwise required by conditions attached to this planning permission the development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved documents: (a) Site Location Plan Ref 2307/188/02 dated 16 November 2011 (b) Site Layout Plan Ref 2307/188/03 dated 16 November 2011 (c) Proposed Elevations Ref 2307/1888/04 dated 21 November 2011 (d) Planning Application forms dated 21 November 2011 (e) Planning, Design and Access Statement dated 21 December 2011 (f) Environmental Noise Survey Ref 2307-188-F dated 24 November 2011 (g) Catchment Area Assessment Ref 2307-188-G dated December 2011 (h) Indicative Catchment Area Plan Ref 2307/188/05 dated 14 December 2011 (i) Waste Audit and Facilities Strategy Ref 2307-188-0 dated 21 November 2011 Tk WP/2012/0008/C 15 to 21 Tk Finedon Road Industrial Estate

El Sub Sta Silos

5 5 G

51.6m 39 to 43 to 39 BEVAN CLOSE

El Sub Sta 51.2m A

49.8m 9

Conveyor Legend WP/2012/0008/C - 3-4 (Learner Pallets)El SubBevan Sta Close, Wellingborough Planning & Local Development © Crown Copyright and database right 2012. Description Scale: Ordnance Survey 100018694. This map is accurate Applicants Property 1:1,250 Cities Revealed to the scale specified Aerial Photography copyright: when reproduced at A4 ± GetMapping PLC 1999 Application Site - 86 -

(j) Landscaping Scheme dated 12 September 2008

Reason: For the avoidance of doubt and in the interests of proper planning.

Operation Limits

3. The amount of imported waste shall not exceed 49,000 tonnes per annum.

4. The development hereby permitted shall be restricted to the treatment of non hazardous wood waste. The developer shall ensure that processes are in place to deal with any prohibited waste delivered to site.

5. No external processing or external storage of wood waste shall take place on site.

Reason for conditions 3 to 5: To define the scope of the permission and in the interest of the amenity of the local area having regard to Policy CS14 of the Northamptonshire Core Strategy DPD (May 2010).

Highway Safety and Access

6. Prior to the commencement of development a scheme for access improvements shall be submitted to the Waste Planning Authority for approval in writing. The scheme as approved shall be implemented fully prior to the commencement of all other development work and thereafter maintained for the lifetime of the development.

7. Prior to the commencement of development a scheme for vehicle manoeuvring and parking shall be submitted to the Waste Planning Authority for approval in writing. The scheme shall demonstrate that the site can adequately accommodate the turning movements, parking and standing arrangements for delivery vehicles and staff cars without encroaching onto or adversely affecting the use of the adjacent highway network. The approved scheme shall be implemented in full prior to the import of wood waste to the site and shall be maintained for the lifetime of the development.

8. All vehicular access and egress to and from the site shall be through the access constructed in accordance with condition 6. No other access shall be used by vehicles entering or exiting the site.

9. The total number of HGV movements associated with this development hereby permitted shall not exceed 420 per week (an average of 70 per day).

10. All operational vehicles arriving at and leaving the site shall be cleansed of mud and other debris to ensure that there is no nuisance dust and no mud or debris deposited on the public highway.

11. All operational vehicles arriving at and leaving the site shall be appropriately sealed so as to prevent material spillage and wind blow nuisance.

- 87 -

Reason for conditions 6 to 11: To ensure satisfactory access and safeguard the interest of users of the public highway having regard to Policy CS14 of the Core Strategy DPD (May 2010).

Hours of Working

12. Except in emergencies (which shall be notified to the Waste Planning Authority as soon as practicable) or unless otherwise approved in writing by the Waste Planning Authority, the receipt of fuel and all other external operations, excluding the operation of generator plant, shall be restricted to between the hours of 07.30 and 18.00 Mondays to Fridays and 08.00 and 13.00 on Saturdays, with no receipt of fuel or other external operations on Sundays, Public or Bank Holidays.

Dust and Noise

13. Prior to the commencement of development a scheme for dust and noise management shall be submitted to the Waste Planning Authority for approval in writing. The scheme shall demonstrate the necessary noise reduction to comply with condition 14. The approved scheme shall be implemented in full prior to the import of wood waste to the site and shall be maintained for the lifetime of the development.

14. The rating level of noise generated from the operation of the plant shall not exceed the existing background level noise at the boundary of the nearby residential premises, determined by the applicant to be LA90 34dB 20min, by more than 5dB at any time. The noise levels shall be determined by measurement or calculation at the boundary of nearby residential premises namely Hillside Road, Finedon Road, Nest Lane or Swallow Close. The measurements and assessment shall be made in accordance with SS 4142:1997.

15. The enclosure surrounding the machinery shall be tested prior to commencement of use to ensure that the noise reduction quoted is achieved.

16. No vehicles and/or mobile plant used exclusively on site shall be operated unless they have been fitted with "white" noise alarms to ensure that, when reversing, they do not emit a warning noise that would have an adverse impact on residential amenity.

17. No vehicle, plant, equipment or machinery used exclusively on site shall be operated at the site unless it has been fitted with and uses an effective silencer. All vehicles, plant, equipment and machinery shall be maintained in accordance with the manufacturer's specifications.

18. In the event that complaints regarding dust or noise are received by the Waste Planning Authority from any sensitive receptor, and thereafter notified to the operator, an assessment of the complaint shall be undertaken by the operator. A report on the findings, with proposals for removing, reducing or mitigating identified adverse effects resulting from the operation, and a programme for the implementation of remedial measures and works to be undertaken shall be - 88 -

submitted to the Waste Planning Authority no later than five working days from the receipt of the complaint, unless a later date is otherwise agreed in writing by the Waste Planning Authority. If complaints relate to noise and complaints continue after the remedial measures have been implemented, following written notification from the Waste Planning Authority noise monitoring shall be undertaken to verify whether the requirements of condition 14 are being met.

Reason for conditions 12 to 18: In the interest of the amenity of the local area having regard to Policy CS14 of the Northamptonshire Core Strategy DPD (May 2010).

Construction

19. Except in emergencies (which shall be notified to the Waste Planning Authority as soon as practicable) or unless otherwise approved in writing by the Waste Planning Authority, all works relating to construction shall be restricted to between the hours of 07.00 and 18.00 Mondays to Fridays, and 07.00 and 13.00 Saturdays with no construction works on Sundays, Public or Bank Holidays.

20. Prior to the commencement of any part of the development hereby permitted, a Construction Management Scheme shall be submitted in writing to the Waste Planning Authority. The Construction Management Scheme shall include and specify the provision to be made for the following:

(a) Overall strategy for managing environmental impacts which raise during construction;

(b) Measures to control the emission of dust and dirt during construction;

(d) Construction Plant Directional signage (on and off site);

(e) Provision for emergency vehicles;

(f) Provision for all site operatives, visitors and construction vehicles loading and unloading plant and materials;

(g) Provision for all site operatives, visitors and construction vehicles for parking and turning within the site during the construction period;

(h) Details of measures to prevent mud and other such material migrating onto the highway from construction vehicles;

(i) Storage of plant and materials used in constructing the development; and

(j) Measures for the protection of trees, shrubs and hedges; and

(k) Waste audit and scheme for waste minimisation and recycling/disposing of waste resulting from construction works including confirmation of any material exports, routing and deposition sites. - 89 -

The approved Construction Management Scheme shall be adhered to throughout the construction period and the approved measures shall be retained for the duration of the construction works unless otherwise approved in writing by the Waste Planning Authority.

Reason for conditions 19 to 20: In the interests of highway safety and the amenity of the local area having regard to Policy CS14 of the Northamptonshire Core Strategy DPD (May 2010).

Surface Water Drainage

21. Prior to the commencement of development a detailed scheme to accommodate surface water drainage arisings from the development hereby permitted shall be submitted to the Waste Planning Authority for approval in writing. The scheme shall include full details of the design including location, dimension and gradient of all elements of the system and management of surface water runoff. It should also include a detailed proposal for the long-term maintenance of the system in its entirety. The scheme as approved shall be maintained throughout the life of the development.

Reason: To minimise the risk of pollution of water courses and aquifers and to minimise the risk of flooding having regard to Policy CS14 of the Northamptonshire Core Strategy DPD (May 2010).

Contaminated Land

22. If, during development, contamination not previously identified is found to be present at the site then no further development (unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Waste Planning Authority) shall be carried out until the developer has submitted, and obtained written approval from the Waste Planning Authority for a remediation strategy detailing how this unsuspected contamination shall be dealt with.

Reason: To ensure that risks from land contamination are minimised and to ensure that the development can be carried out safely without unacceptable risks to people and the environment having regard to Policy CS14 of the Northamptonshire Core Strategy DPD (May 2010).

Lighting

23. No fixed lighting shall be erected or installed until details of the location, height, design, sensors, and luminance have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Waste Planning Authority. The details shall ensure the lighting is designed to minimise the potential nuisance of light spillage on adjoining properties, natural environment and highways. The lighting shall thereafter be erected, installed and operated in accordance with the approved details.

Reason: In the interest of the amenity of the local area having regard to Policy CS14 of the Northamptonshire Core Strategy DPD (May 2010). - 90 -

Materials

24. No building shall be erected until details of the materials to be used for the external appearance of the building have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Waste Planning Authority. The details shall include the materials, colours and finishes to be used on the building. The development shall be implemented in accordance with the approved details.

Reason: In the interest of the amenity of the local area having regard to Policy CS14 of the Northamptonshire Core Strategy DPD (May 2010) and Policy CMD10 of the Northamptonshire Control and Management of Development DPD (June 2011).

Landscaping

25. The approved landscaping scheme entitled 'Lamer Pallets Landscaping' dated 12 September 2008 shall be implemented within the first available planting season following the commencement of development hereby permitted.

26. Trees, shrubs and hedges planted in accordance with the approved scheme shall be maintained and any plants which within 5 years of planting die, are removed or become seriously damaged or diseased shall be replaced in the next planting season with others of a similar size and species, unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Waste Planning Authority.

Reason for conditions 25 to 26: To ensure the enhancement of the site and to safeguard the visual amenities of the area having regard to Policy CS14 of the Northamptonshire Core Strategy DPD (May 2010) and Policy CMD7 of the Northamptonshire Control and Management of Development DPD (June 2011).

Pollution Prevention

27. All wastes accepted onto site must be handled (stored, separated and treated) in an enclosed area and on an impermeable surface with a sealed drainage system.

28. Any facilities, above ground, for the storage of oils, fuels or chemicals shall be provided with adequate, durable secondary containment to prevent the escape of pollutants. The bunded area shall be designed, constructed and maintained in order that it can contain a capacity not less than 110% of the total volume of all tanks or drums contained therein.

29. All filling points, vents, gauges and sight glasses should be bunded. Any tank overflow pipe outlets shall be directed into the bund. Associated pipework should be located above ground and protected from accidental damage. There shall be no gravity or automatic discharge arrangement for bund contents. Contaminated bund contents shall not be discharged to any watercourse, land or soakaway.

Reason for conditions 27 to 29: To prevent pollution of the water environment, having regard to Policy CS14 of the Northamptonshire Core Strategy DPD (May 2010). - 91 -

Catchment Area

30. All waste materials to be processed on the site shall originate from locations within the area shown on the submitted Indicative Catchment Area Plan Ref 2307/188/05, dated 14 December 2011.

Reason: To ensure that waste materials are dealt with as close to their source as possible in the interests of self sufficiency and sustainability having regard to Policy CS9 of the Core Strategy DPD (May 2010) and to enable the Waste Planning Authority to monitor progress towards achieving the principles in Policy CS1 of the Core Strategy DPD (May 2010) and Policy CMD1 and CMD14 of the Control and Management of Development DPD (June 2011).

Monitoring

31. The operating company shall submit an annual report in writing to the Waste Planning Authority within one month of the first anniversary of operations commencing and at 12 monthly intervals thereafter. The report shall include detailed information on the types, quantities and sources of all waste materials brought on to the site and taken off site, including records of volumes and vehicle movements demonstrating compliance with conditions 3 and 9 of this permission. The annual report shall also incorporate records that demonstrate compliance with the indicative catchment area plan (condition 30). The information required by this condition shall also be supplied at any other time on request by the Waste Planning Authority. All such information will be treated on a confidential basis.

Reason: To enable the Waste Planning Authority to monitor progress towards achieving the principles in Policy CS1 of the Northamptonshire Core Strategy DPD (May 2010) and to ensure that waste materials are dealt with close to their source in accordance with Policy CS9 of the Northamptonshire Core Strategy DPD (May 2010) and Policy CMD1 and CMD14 of the Control and Management of Development DPD (June 2011).

INFORMATIVE Flood Risk Standing Advice 1. The applicant's attention is drawn to the Environment Agency Flood Risk Standing Advice which can be viewed on the Environment Agency web site at www.environment-agency.gov.uk.

Pollution Prevention 2. Only surface water from roofs and paved areas not accessible to vehicles, should be discharged to any soakaway, watercourse or surface water sewer. Prior to being discharged into any watercourse, surface water sewer or soakaway system, all Environment Agency, Nene House (Pytchley Lodge Industrial Estate), Pytchley Lodge Road, Kettering, Northants, NN15 6JQ Email: [email protected] www.environmentagency.gov.uk Customer services line: 03708 506 506 Weekday daytime calls to 0370 numbers cost 8p plus up to 6p per minute from BT Weekend Unlimited. Mobile and other providers' charges may vary. - 92 -

3. Surface water drainage from parking areas and hard standings susceptible to oil contamination must be passed through an oil separator designed and constructed to have a capacity and details compatible with the site being drained. Roof water should not pass through the interceptor.

4. Facilities should be provided within the site drainage systems for the interception and storage of contaminated water used in fire fighting. Advice on suitable means can be given by the Environment Agency in conjunction with the Fire Authority.

5. All washdown and disinfectant waters must be discharged to the foul sewer.

6. Vehicle loading or unloading bays and storage areas involving chemicals, refuse or other polluting matter must not be connected to the surface water drainage system. A closure valve should be installed at the oil separator outlet and in the surface water drainage system to contain any polluting material in the event of an emergency. Foul and surface water manhole covers should be marked to enable easy recognition, convention is red for foul and blue for surface water. This is to enable water pollution incidents to be more readily traced.

7. Waste from the development must be re-used, re-cycled or otherwise disposed of in accordance with waste management legislation and in particular the Duty of Care. Further information can be obtained from www.environmentagency.gov.uk.

Environmental Permitting 8. The development will require an Environmental Permit under the Environmental Permitting Regulations 2010, from the Environment Agency. The Applicant is advised to contact the Environment Agency on 08708 506 506 for further advice and to discuss the issues likely to be raised. You should be aware that the permit may not be granted. Additional 'Environmental Permitting Guidance' can be accessed via our main website (http://www.environmentagency.gov.uk).

Flood Defence Consent 9. Notwithstanding the planning permission(s) that may be granted or extant on the site, any proposed works affecting ordinary watercourses, statutory main rivers, within the indicative floodplain or within the byelaw distance requires the prior written consent of the Environment Agency under the relevant statutory legislation and current land drainage byelaws.

10. It should not be assumed that such consent will automatically be forthcoming, and the applicant should consult with the Environment Agency at the earliest opportunity in order to determine and secure formal flood defence consent for the proposed works as appropriate.

REASONS FOR APPROVAL The proposal is for the erection of a new industrial building, plant and machinery and installation of a biomass fuelled power plant. Similar developments were considered acceptable in 2008 and 2009 and again in 2011. This proposal is for a larger scale operation but is considered acceptable in the context of the current policy framework. - 93 -

In particular the principle of the development is acceptable in accordance with Policies CS1 and CS2 of the Northamptonshire Minerals and Waste Development Framework Core Strategy Development Plan Document (DPD) (2010) and Policy CMD1 of the Control and Management of Development DPD (2011). Issues focussing around amenity impacts, contamination and fire risk have been raised by a neighbouring business. The potential local impacts have been considered in detail previously by officers and the Development Control Committee and have again under been assessed under this application. No objections have been raised by the Borough Council of Wellingborough or the Environment Agency. Overall it is considered that subject to conditions the proposals are in accordance with Policy CS14 of the Core Strategy DPD. Further controls would be in place under the pollution control regime. There are no other matters which would justify refusal of this application and for these reasons it is considered that permission should be granted subject to the recommended conditions. - 94 - 9th May 2012

AGRICULTURAL DETERMINATION NOTICE

Application No. Applicants Location of Proposal Decision Name Description of Proposal

WP/2012/0119/AG Mr Alun Dicks Land to North of Agreed C Dicks & Sons Limited 62 Northfield Lodge, Orlingbury Road, Isham. Portal frame building for the storage of grain/plant/machinery as required for agricultural use (Prior Notification).

- 95 -

9th May 2012

PLANNING COMMITTEE

The following applications dealt with under the terms of the Head of Planning and Development delegated powers.

Application No. Location of Proposal Decision Applicant’s Name Description of Proposal

WP/2012/0004/AV Mr Leigh Elmore 24 Silver Street, AC Bar Fever Wellingborough Wellingborough. Limited New signage.

WP/2012/0062/F Mr Phil Archer South Midlands Co-operative AC Standard One Property Society Limited, Development 23 25 Newton Road, Wollaston. Installation of new entrance door way and porch due to increase in ramp for DDA Regulations. New entrance ramp and shopfront glazing to be installed. New removable key-clamp barrier and refrigeration plant to rear yard.

WP/2012/0071/F Mr Michael Hawes 9 Talbot Road, APPROVED Wellingborough. Erection of wooden summerhouse approx 2m x 2m x 3m.

WP/2012/0074/F Mr and Mrs Ian Catlin 60 Dowthorpe Hill, AC Earls Barton. General internal alterations together with an extension to the front and conversion of the garage to a playroom and store.

WP/2012/0076/F Mr Wooter De Jager Olympic Supermarket, REFUSED O'Sullivan Shopfitting 10 Olympic Way, Wellingborough. Installation of a new external ATM machine to replace the existing internal ATM machine - to be located at the front of the store.

- 96 -

Application No. Location of Proposal Decision Applicant’s Name Description of Proposal

WP/2012/0079/AV Food Programme Delivery South Midlands Co-operative AC Orchid Group Society Limited, 23 25 Newton Road, Wollaston. 1 x freestanding double sided twin legged post sign.

WP/2012/0080/F Mr Peter Cartwright Wellingborough Rugby AC Wellingborough Rugby Football Club, Football Club Cut Throat Lane, Great Doddington. Single storey side kitchen extension.

WP/2012/0081/F Mr and Mrs Goodman 45 Chatsworth Drive, AC Wellingborough. Single storey extension to rear elevation.

WP/2012/0083/FCOU Dignity Plc 7 Saxon Court, APPROVED Bradfield Close, Wellingborough. Change of use application from B1/B8 to sui generis (funeral care centralised facility consisting of general office, coffin fitting, car cleaning and occasional embalming - amended site address.

WP/2012/0084/ELUD Goddard Warehousing Land at Finedon Sidings, APPROVED Furnace Lane, Isham. Application for a Lawful Development Certificate for an Existing Use - use of land as contractor's depot.

WP/2012/0088/F Mr Marcus Rock 1 4 Nielson Road, APPROVED 5NPlus Finedon Road Industrial Estate, Wellingborough. Proposed Chlorine storage shed.

WP/2012/0089/F Mr Michael Hart 11 Streeton Way, APPROVED Earls Barton. Construction of UPVc conservatory with lower section constructed in fascia brickwork. - 97 -

Application No. Location of Proposal Decision Applicant’s Name Description of Proposal

WP/2012/0095/RVC Ms April Knapp Laundry Premises, APPROVED East Midlands Housing Buckwell End/Short Lane, Association Limited Wellingborough. Removal of condition 2 of WP/2010/0402/CA to allow demolition to take place before a contract for the works in respect of the full permission (WP/2010/0401/FM) is in place to prevent vandalism and the risk of public safety.

WP/2012/0101/AV Mr Robert Dargie Broad Green Peugeot, AC Peugeot Motor Company Plc St Johns Street, Wellingborough. 3 no. fascia signs internally illuminated halo illumination, 2 no. sets of corner lights, 1 no. free standing externally illuminated totem sign, 1 no. portique entrance surround, 1 set of 3 non-illuminated fabric flags.

WP/2012/0104/FCOU Mr Stephen Wright 1 Yeldon Court, APPROVED Lee Cabs Limited Wellingborough. Change of use as a taxi operator office, no special adaptions or use of radios/masts as all jobs are despatched to drivers using mobile sim data. Light mechanical work to be conducted within the premises on company owned vehicles only by an in house company employed mechanic. Main use of premises is general office work consisting of inbound call handling and communicating with drivers and customers.

- 98 -

Application No. Location of Proposal Decision Applicant’s Name Description of Proposal

WP/2012/0110/F Mr Ian Marren 25-37 and 28-34 Eastfield AC Marren Microwave Limited Road, Wollaston. The internal and external alterations to two commercial/office units in order to rationalise the layout and create dedicated areas for both office and storage. The replacement of an existing roof structure and its replacement with a new one in order to improve the drainage.

WP/2012/0111/F Mr N Lovell 3 Eastfield Road, REFUSED Wellingborough. New dwelling on under- utilised garden land.

WP/2012/0148/NMA Marks and Spencer Unit 4 Castlefields Retail APPROVED Park, 22 London Road, Wellingborough. Non material amendment to WP/2011/0560/F for relocation of the "empties area" from the rear elevation adjacent to the goods in entrance, to the side elevation adjacent to the approved plant area.

WP/2012/0178/NMA Mr Nicul Odedra Grangefield Residential Home, APPROVED 60 Northampton Road, Earls Barton. Non material amendment to substitute the 3 roof lights in the proposed dining room for one lantern light 5.7m long x 1.2m wide.

BACKGROUND PAPERS

The background papers for the planning and building applications contained in this report form part of the relevant files appertaining to individual applications as referenced.

Borough Council of Wellingborough, Planning and Local Development, Swanspool House, Doddington Road, Wellingborough.

- 99 -

PLANNING COMMITTEE - BUILDING REGULATION DECISIONS ISSUED APPLICATIONS DEALT WITH APPLICATION DECISIONS BOROUGH OF WELLINGBOROUGH Date: 17/04/2012

Application No. Name & Address Description

FP/2012/0070/ Mrs Smith Alterations to properties to create 1 Chequers Lane new dwelling. APPROVED Grendon

FP/2012/0076/ Time Leisure Limited Conversion of former workshops The Embankment into retail units. REJECTED Wellingborough

FP/2012/0077/ Ms Juliet Jarvis Alterations to existing dwelling. Main Road REJECTED Grendon Wellingborough

PS/2012/0436/ Milton Keynes Council New build bungalow. Civic Offices APPROVED C 1 Saxon Gate East Milton Keynes

FP/2012/0479/ Mr and Mrs Morrall Single storey rear extension to form Wilson Way utility room. APPROVED Earls Barton Wellingborough

PS/2012/0555/ Leicester City Council Single and two storey rear New Walk extensions to dwelling. APPROVED C Centre Welford Place Leicester - 100 -

PLANNING COMMITTEE - BUILDING REGULATION DECISIONS ISSUED APPLICATIONS DEALT WITH APPLICATION DECISIONS BOROUGH OF WELLINGBOROUGH Date: 17/04/2012

Application No. Name & Address Description

PS/2012/0750/ Bedford Borough Council Proposed extension and alterations. Horne Lane APPROVED C Bedford

FP/2012/0764/ Oakfied Limited Two new shower rooms and Easton Maudit alterations. APPROVED C Village Easton Maudit Wellingborough

BN/2012/0765/ Carl Green 12 sq/m single storey extension to 9 Neale Close existing garage. ACCEPTED Wollaston Northants

DI/2012/0771/ Mr Smith Level access shower room. 56 Hayden Ave ACCEPTED Finedon Northants

DI/2012/0772/ Mrs K Patel Conversion of bathroom 2 Osprey Lane into a shower room. ACCEPTED Wellingborough Northants

BN/2012/0774/ Corinne Aylott Connection of rainwater guttering to Unity Close existing soil waste. Consent already ACCEPTED Wollaston received from Anglian Water Wellingborough subject to works meeting Building Control approval. - 101 -

PLANNING COMMITTEE - BUILDING REGULATION DECISIONS ISSUED APPLICATIONS DEALT WITH APPLICATION DECISIONS BOROUGH OF WELLINGBOROUGH Date: 17/04/2012

Application No. Name & Address Description

DI/2012/0775/ Mrs Osbourne Conversion of bathroom 126 Knox Road into a shower room. ACCEPTED Wellingborough Northants

DI/2012/0820/ Mrs E M Hayes Level access bathroom. Queensway ACCEPTED Wellingborough

DI/2012/0821/ Mrs M Goode Level access bathroom. Weavers Road ACCEPTED Wellingborough

DI/2012/0822/ The Occupier Level access bathroom. Thrush Lane ACCEPTED Wellingborough

BN/2012/0825/ Mr Vladislav Stancov Building back extension. Fulmar Lane ACCEPTED Wellingborough

BN/2012/0832/ Mr R Harris Removal of wall between lounge Ridgeway and dining room. ACCEPTED Wellingborough - 102 -

PLANNING COMMITTEE - BUILDING REGULATION DECISIONS ISSUED APPLICATIONS DEALT WITH APPLICATION DECISIONS BOROUGH OF WELLINGBOROUGH Date: 17/04/2012

Application No. Name & Address Description

BN/2012/0833/ Mr Line Ground floor extension to rear. Eastfield Crescent ACCEPTED Finedon Wellingborough

FP/2012/0898/ Mr C Stanley Rear extension. Main Street APPROVED Little Harrowden Wellingborough

BN/2012/0933/ Mr R Marks Load bearing wall removal in Barnwell Gardens kitchen. ACCEPTED Wellingborough

FP/2012/0934/ Mr P Skinner Single storey rear extension to The Pyghtle kitchen. APPROVED Wellingborough

BN/2012/0937/ Mr Nick Peasnell Glazed extension to rear of house. John Gray Road ACCEPTED Great Doddington Wellingborough

DI/2012/0938/ Mrs W Evans Level access shower room. King Street ACCEPTED Earls Barton Wellingborough - 103 -

PLANNING COMMITTEE - BUILDING REGULATION DECISIONS ISSUED APPLICATIONS DEALT WITH APPLICATION DECISIONS BOROUGH OF WELLINGBOROUGH Date: 17/04/2012

Application No. Name & Address Description

BN/2012/0939/ Mr Tanna Single storey extension. Thames Road ACCEPTED Wellingborough

DI/2012/0973/ Mrs W Maloney Conversion of bathroom into a Highfield Road shower room. ACCEPTED Wellingborough

BN/2012/0995/ Mr Stuart Docker Roof strengthening. Hazeldene Close ACCEPTED Wollaston

BN/2012/0996/ Jacqui Giles Knocking down dining room wall Glenfield Drive into kitchen. Installation of RSJ. ACCEPTED Great Doddington Wellingborough

DM/2012/0997/ Mr Mark Smith Demolition of shoe factory. Life Space Developments ACCEPTED 76 Church Way Weston Favell Northampton

BN/2012/1139/ Mr and Mrs Williams Replacement of flat roof with a Eastlands Road pitched roof. ACCEPTED Finedon Wellingborough - 104 -

PLANNING COMMITTEE - BUILDING REGULATION DECISIONS ISSUED APPLICATIONS DEALT WITH APPLICATION DECISIONS BOROUGH OF WELLINGBOROUGH Date: 17/04/2012

Application No. Name & Address Description

BN/2012/1140/ Mr David Richardson Single storey extension to rear. Swanspool Parade ACCEPTED Wellingborough

DI/2012/1141/ Mr M Morton Conversion of bathroom into a Baker Crescent shower room. ACCEPTED Irchester Wellingborough

BN/2012/1142/ Eleanor Tatham Complete renovation of property George Street including: ACCEPTED Wellingborough 1) Removal of all internal plaster on walls and ceilings 2) Installation of RSJ's to support ceiling where supporting wall had been removed and incorrectly supported 3) Removal of internal wall and installation of RSJ 4) Digging up a section of floor to install damp proof course 5) Replacement of electrical, plumbing and sanitary devices. Drawings for points 2 and 3 have been supplied by a structural engineer.

BN/2012/1177/ Graham Pickard Re-roofing. Wellingborough Homes ACCEPTED Sheep Street Wellingborough - 105 -

PLANNING COMMITTEE - BUILDING REGULATION DECISIONS ISSUED APPLICATIONS DEALT WITH APPLICATION DECISIONS BOROUGH OF WELLINGBOROUGH Date: 17/04/2012

Application No. Name & Address Description

BN/2012/1178/ Graham Pickard Re-roofing. Wellingborough Homes ACCEPTED Sheep Street Wellingborough

BN/2012/1179/ Graham Pickard Re-roofing. Wellingborough Homes ACCEPTED Sheep Street Wellingborough

BN/2012/1180/ Graham Pickard Re-roofing. Wellingborough Homes ACCEPTED Sheep Street Wellingborough

BN/2012/1181/ Graham Pickard Re-roofing. Wellingborough Homes ACCEPTED Sheep Street Wellingborough

BN/2012/1182/ Graham Pickard Re-roofing. Wellingborough Homes ACCEPTED Sheep Street Wellingborough

BN/2012/1183/ Graham Pickard Re-roofing. Wellingborough Homes ACCEPTED Sheep Street Wellingborough - 106 -

PLANNING COMMITTEE - BUILDING REGULATION DECISIONS ISSUED APPLICATIONS DEALT WITH APPLICATION DECISIONS BOROUGH OF WELLINGBOROUGH Date: 17/04/2012

Application No. Name & Address Description

BN/2012/1184/ Graham Pickard Re-roofing. Wellingborough Homes ACCEPTED Sheep Street Wellingborough

BN/2012/1185/ Graham Pickard Re-roofing. Wellingborough Homes ACCEPTED Sheep Street Wellingborough

BN/2012/1186/ Graham Pickard Re-roofing. Wellingborough Homes ACCEPTED Sheep Street Wellingborough

BN/2012/1187/ Graham Pickard Re-roofing. Wellingborough Homes ACCEPTED Sheep Street Wellingborough

BN/2012/1188/ Graham Pickard Re-roofing. Wellingborough Homes ACCEPTED Sheep Street Wellingborough

BN/2012/1189/ Graham Pickard Re-roofing. Wellingborough Homes ACCEPTED Sheep Street Wellingborough - 107 -

PLANNING COMMITTEE - BUILDING REGULATION DECISIONS ISSUED APPLICATIONS DEALT WITH APPLICATION DECISIONS BOROUGH OF WELLINGBOROUGH Date: 17/04/2012

Application No. Name & Address Description

BN/2012/1190/ Graham Pickard Re-roofing. Wellingborough Homes ACCEPTED Sheep Street Wellingborough

BN/2012/1191/ Graham Pickard Re-roofing. Wellingborough Homes ACCEPTED Sheep Street Wellingborough

BN/2012/1192/ Graham Pickard Re-roofing. Wellingborough Homes ACCEPTED Sheep Street Wellingborough

BN/2012/1193/ Graham Pickard Re-roofing. Wellingborough Homes ACCEPTED Sheep Street Wellingborough

BN/2012/1194/ Graham Pickard Re-roofing. Wellingborough Homes ACCEPTED Sheep Street Wellingborough

BN/2012/1195/ Graham Pickard Re-roofing. Wellingborough Homes ACCEPTED Sheep Street Wellingborough - 108 -

PLANNING COMMITTEE - BUILDING REGULATION DECISIONS ISSUED APPLICATIONS DEALT WITH APPLICATION DECISIONS BOROUGH OF WELLINGBOROUGH Date: 17/04/2012

Application No. Name & Address Description

BN/2012/1196/ Graham Pickard Re-roofing. Wellingborough Homes ACCEPTED Sheep Street Wellingborough

BN/2012/1197/ Graham Pickard Re-roofing. Wellingborough Homes ACCEPTED Sheep Street Wellingborough

BN/2012/1198/ Graham Pickard Re-roofing. Wellingborough Homes ACCEPTED Sheep Street Wellingborough

BN/2012/1199/ Graham Pickard Re-roofing. Wellingborough Homes ACCEPTED Sheep Street Wellingborough

BN/2012/1200/ Graham Pickard Re-roofing. Wellingborough Homes ACCEPTED Sheep Street Wellingborough

BN/2012/1201/ Graham Pickard Re-roofing. Wellingborough Homes ACCEPTED Sheep Street Wellingborough - 109 -

PLANNING COMMITTEE - BUILDING REGULATION DECISIONS ISSUED APPLICATIONS DEALT WITH APPLICATION DECISIONS BOROUGH OF WELLINGBOROUGH Date: 17/04/2012

Application No. Name & Address Description

BN/2012/1202/ Graham Pickard Re-roofing. Wellingborough Homes ACCEPTED Sheep Street Wellingborough

BN/2012/1203/ Graham Pickard Re-roofing. Wellingborough Homes ACCEPTED Sheep Street Wellingborough

BN/2012/1204/ Graham Pickard Re-roofing. Wellingborough Homes ACCEPTED Sheep Street Wellingborough

BN/2012/1205/ Graham Pickard Re-roofing. Wellingborough Homes ACCEPTED Sheep Street Wellingborough

BN/2012/1206/ Graham Pickard Re-roofing. Wellingborough Homes ACCEPTED Sheep Street Wellingborough

DI/2012/1240/ Mrs Price Conversion of bathroom into a Swinburne Road shower room. ACCEPTED Wellingborough - 110 -

PLANNING COMMITTEE - BUILDING REGULATION DECISIONS ISSUED APPLICATIONS DEALT WITH APPLICATION DECISIONS BOROUGH OF WELLINGBOROUGH Date: 17/04/2012

Application No. Name & Address Description

DI/2012/1241/ Mr Monah Conversion of bathroom into a Midland Road shower room. ACCEPTED Wellingborough

BN/2012/1244/ Mr Gordon Carstairs Extension. Hatfield Close ACCEPTED Wellingborough - 111 -

Received Appeals

Appeal Site Ref. No. Date Status Received

Adj. 204 Priory Road, WP/2011/0372/O 29/11/2011 Statement of Case Wellingborough Sent – Awaiting Site Visit

41 and 45 Main Road, WP/2011/0216/F 20/01/2012 Statement of Case Grendon Sent – Awaiting Site Visit

128 Ecton Lane, WP/2011/0484/F 25/01/2012 Statement of Case Sywell Sent – Awaiting Site Visit

Land Rear of 1-73 WP/2011/0388/OM 01/02/2012 Statement of Case Compton Way, Sent – Public Inquiry Earls Barton set for 12 June 2012