Borough Council of Wellingborough Planning Committee Wednesday 4Th November 2009 at 7.00 Pm Council Chamber, Swanspool House

Borough Council of Wellingborough Planning Committee Wednesday 4th November 2009 at 7.00 pm Council Chamber, Swanspool House

INDEX

Page No. SITE VIEWING GROUP

WP/2009/0246/OM - Allotment land to the rear of and to include 60 Senwick Road, Wellingborough. 1 WP/2009/0297/F - 1 Poplar Street, Wellingborough. 8 WP/2009/0306/F - Land adjacent 150 Wellingborough Road, Earls Barton. 16 WP/2009/0310/F - 81 John Gray Road, Great Doddington. 23 WP/2009/0319/F - Land adjacent to 43 Norlinton Close, Orlingbury. 28 WP/2009/0336/F 4 Kings Lane, Little Harrowden. 33 WP/2009/0378/F - 1 Mill Lane, Isham. 36

DISTRICT

WP/2009/0365/C - Larner Pallets, 32-50 Rixon Road, Wellingborough. 41 WP/2009/0395/OB - New Albion Wind Farm, Towns Close Farm (land at), Rushton. 44 WP/2009/0396/C - Earls Barton Junior School, 5 Broad Street, Earls Barton. 48 WP/2009/0397/C - White Plant, 301 Grendon Road, Earls Barton. 49

FOR INFORMATION WP/2008/0373/OB - Hawthorn Road (land off) Burton Latimer, Kettering. 52

- 1 -

BOROUGH COUNCIL OF WELLINGBOROUGH AGENDA ITEM

SITE VIEWING (Date of visit 3rd November 2009 at 10.50 a.m.)

Planning Committee 04/11/2009

Report of the Head of Built Environment

APPLICATION REF: WP/2009/0246/OM

PROPOSAL: Outline application with all matters reserved for residential development of 31 dwellings with access from Senwick Road including the demolition of 60 Senwick Road.

LOCATION: Allotment land to the rear of and to include 60 Senwick Road, Wellingborough. NN8 1NJ

APPLICANT: Cluny Estates Limited.

Major development requiring Committee consideration owing to the number of objections and because it conflicts with the provisions in the prevailing development plans and national guidance. A site visit is also recommended.

PROPOSAL AND DESCRIPTION OF SITE: Outline consent is sought for a residential development on this site, with all the matters reserved for future consideration. Notwithstanding, an indicative/illustrative layout is submitted showing the arrangement for 31 dwellings on the site together with access, parking provisions and landscaping. No. 60 Senwick Road (a bungalow) would be demolished to create an access road to the development from Senwick Road.

The application site measures about 0.58 hectare and lies on the western side of Senwick Road, opposite the junction of Senwick Drive. The site abuts Swanspool Brook to the south and is bounded by residential properties fronting Chace Road to the north, Chester Road to the west and Senwick Road to the east.

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY: Allotment land with no history. No 60 Senwick Road, which is part of the site, is the subject of an approved application for a single storey rear extension in June 2004 (WP/2004/0285).

NATIONAL AND LOCAL PLANNING POLICY: Planning Policy Statement 1: Delivering Sustainable Development Planning Policy Statement 3: Housing Planning Policy Guidance Note 17: Planning for Open Space, Sport and Recreation Planning Policy Statement 25: Development and Flood Risk East Midlands Regional Plan Policy 28: Regional Priorities for Environmental and Green Infrastructure @ 4

0 5

t o

27 PH

153 19 El Sub Sta 3

2 6 5 13 11 151 63.4m 5 14 1

OAD B St Mary's Church EN R

3 YD 0 R D Car Park 133 63.0m WP/2009/0246/OM Y 1 B 490000 490400 Issues k MP 65 (

1 4 2 | (

4 |

1 3 2 2 Borough Council Of Wellingborough: Licence No.100018694. Published 20/10/2009 ( k 57.6m ddoc B Pa ary's

St M Car Park 2

1 901 902 903

4 1 @ 1

( 7

268000 6 268000

3 1 2

ock 3

add 1 y's P Mar 1

St 4

9 E 1 2 1 7 L S

2 E 2

Car Park

o N t

03 1 7

R 1

1 1 D 2

9.4m 9

8 1 B

6 Vicarage a 4

9 6 (

5 9 4 5 . 2 TCB m

TCB Y ( 53.0m 7 191 19 95 LB

185 1 ( B ( |

Car Park

1 9 4 AD D RO LAN

MID

1 8 4

1 7 Sorting Office 6

1 2

1 6 6

679 2 679 56.7m B

175

1 6

171 0

1 1 5 8 165

55.2m

B 2 1

4 1 ( 3

Hotel

1 5 @ 4 0 5

4 2

1 3 0

1 3 45

2 6 2

1 9 2 2

2 47 1 2 4

b 65 53.6m B 1 51 67 2 49.4m B

6 12 9

3 7 2 7

20 1

4 2

0 4

0 8

D 0 1 A @

2 7

O 1 7

40 R 7 7 L 9

EL 0

W 9

L 4

8 O 8 1 H C 3

EST (

Allotment Gardens 50.9m 6

9 6

2 ER 3 9

B 5

3 2 R

O 4

AD 3

7 3 678 1 678 S

E 6

0 N Gas 1

2 W 1

2 1

Gov 0

9 1 I 0 1 1 CK

6 1

1 DR

1 1

1 IV 8

4 E

4 1

0 3 a

1 St 3 1 ub El S

( 2 46.6m B 8 @ 9

2 0 1 6 9

4 12

4 2

7 1 4

2 3 24 S 1

E 6 6 1 4 0 3

D N 6 1 6 A 6 O W 34 CE R 2 HA I

C C

2 1 5 3 K

1 5 8 3 1

R 8

Factory 3

2 0 4 1 3 A

D 5

3 5

1 6

4 1

RIV 4

D 5

27 ICK 1 W 5 3

EN 2

S 8

4 5 4 6 1

Factory 8 4 6

0 5 4 3 1

45.5m 2 4

4 5

B 3 1 6

2 2

8 8 7 6 1

7 6 1

3 4

0 6

10 1

a 3

6 0

1 6

677 2 677 3 1

7 1

1 ENS NIA GARD BRITAN Y

Allotment Gardens Playground

( @

D 4 1 8

D Y 1 D 9

D 2 2

D 9 2 6 D 4

D S

0 8 D 3 DDD D D 4 4

D 8

8 E 2

2 2

4 N 4 2 4

D D 7 0 1 D k 6 o D 0

l Bro W D 1 o o 2 D 2 D p

D D D s n DD D a 9 D Sw 1 0

I 2 2 0 7 C 2 7 D K 3 6

R 2 2 0 2 1 I 2 V 3 4 P 4 D E D a t h

D 2 1 D 6

2 1 23 8 16

D 2

2 0 7 7 2

D 2 6

7 2 2

2 2 D 2 2 P 4 a Dth Castle Fields 8

D 9

1 2

676 7 676

D 0 3

D 3 5

1 2 6

21 7

D 9

2 6

D 3

D 21 3

D 22 1

DD E

D C

20 D E 9

DD R 2 5 C 5 2 42.7m 0 2 7

D Y 2

2 D B

2 0 D X 5 D B 97 45.1m D A

B D D D S 22

D 9

2 D 5

D 3 FS

( D 1 0 D 0 D D 1

D 3 2 IR

TH 1 4

L 3

IN 2

D 3 G

BO D 9 ROU D 231 G H RO D AD D

D 2 0

43.0m 1

13 15a Crown and 10

2 3 B 7 15 Anchor 7 Fire and (PH) Ambulance Station

Tanks Pond 33 Equity House 17 29

E 675 N 675

R W 1 2 O

C 4 A Drill Tower K LB 3 D Pond 5 (

Fire and Ambulance 27

Station 4 1

Equity l a 1 El Sub Sta

g 6 1 IR n T House i H y LIN n G e l B

n O 3 R s u 42.4mB OUG w

S H R

o O

r 8

2 AD 8

C 3

0 4 5

4 4

3 7 2

4 4

2 3 2 3 6 3

2 0

1 to 40 26 6 4 28 1

Rosewood D

t Court o

4 2

8 7 1

22 24

1 8 D 20 2 1

2 Christchurch

1 1

0 House

4 2

2 1

1 5 4 0 6 Govt Offices D 4

A 6 El Sub Sta 4 2 6

2 2 3 8 3

4 0 3 2

4 RO 0

3 8

D 3 Beechwood N Suite A M

Beechwood 8 A 3

6 H GVC

Suite 4 2

4 C 5

D D

7 D Mas

3 2 267400 D 7 B 267400 41.8m

3 490000 901 902 903 490400

4 5 3

D 1

D 24 68 Scale 1:2500 72 o 70 t 56 8 16 D 5 14 Playing Field ULT RA CLOSE D Depot

Pavilion D

6 D 7 D

El Sub D Sta D B - 2 -

North Northants Core Spatial Strategy Policy 1: Strengthening the Network of Settlements Policy 5: Green Infrastructure Policy 6: Infrastructure Delivery and Developer Contributions Policy 7: Delivering Housing Policy 9: Distribution and Location of Development Policy 10: Distribution and Location of Housing Policy 13: General Sustainable Development Principles Policy 14: Energy Efficiency and Sustainable Construction Policy 15: Sustainable Housing Provisions Wellingborough Local Plan Policy G2: Flood Protection Policy L5: Important Amenity Areas

SUMMARY OF REPLIES TO CONSULTATIONS/REPRESENTATIONS RECEIVED 1. NCC Highways – detailed site layout plan showing means of access and off- street parking should be submitted prior to the commencement of the development. A detailed Transport Assessment should also be submitted, which should include amongst others design and safety audits. Financial contribution required to mitigate the effect of the development on the strategic highway network.

2. NCC Education – requires financial contribution towards education provision.

3. Environment Agency – raised objection to the proposal on grounds that the application does not contain any information to indicate that your Authority has applied the flood risk Sequential Test. The proposed development site is shown to be partially within Flood Zone 2 ‘medium probability’ of flooding as detailed on the Environment Agency’s Flood Zone Maps issued to your Authority and as defined in Table D1 of Planning Policy Statement 25 (PPS25).

Applying the Flood Risk Vulnerability Classification in Table D2 of PPS25, the proposed development is classified as ‘more vulnerable’. Table D1 of PPS25 states that such uses should only be permitted in this flood zone if the Sequential Test is passed (as summarised in PPS25 Table D3).

Further objection is also raised in respect of an absence of an acceptable Flood Risk Assessment. The FRA submitted with this application does not comply with the requirements set out in Annex E, paragraph E3 of PPS 25. The submitted FRA does not therefore, provide a suitable basis for assessment to be made of the flood risks arising from the proposed development. The absence of an adequate FRA is therefore sufficient reason in itself for a refusal of planning permission. This reflects the precautionary approach to development in flood risk areas set out in paragraphs 10 and E9 of PPS25.

4. Northamptonshire Police - Northamptonshire Police is unable to provide specific comment to the proposed application due to a lack of information regarding crime prevention. It is very difficult to deal with the specifics of this application due to it being ‘all matters reserved’. Nevertheless, it is strongly suggested that the development be built to attain ACPO Secure by Design award. - 3 -

5. Borough Cultural Development Manager – financial contributions toward maintenance of nearby open space and art provision.

6. Borough Housing Strategy Manager – affordable housing provision on a 25% rent and 5% intermediate housing required.

7. Borough Property Services Manager – recommend refusal on grounds that loss of the allotment land would reduce allotment provision in that area of town to a level which is below that required by planning policy and national guidelines; there is sufficient demand for allotments and demand for allotments is annually increasing.

8. Petition signed by 66 local residents and 10 individual letters of objection against the proposed development. Grounds of opposition are:

- Loss of allotment land; - Many empty properties in the area and no more housing needed; - Traffic problems, congestion and parking etc; - Overlooking and loss of privacy; - Loss of protected species; - Obstruction to access; - Development inappropriate in a flood zone; and - Noise disturbance from demolition and construction works.

ASSESSMENT: Principle There is a general presumption in support of protecting allotment land and other green infrastructure in the development plan comprising the East Midlands Regional Plan (Policy 28), North Northants Core Spatial Strategy (Policy 5) and the Wellingborough Local Plan (Policy L5). These policies are consistent with the advice in Planning Policy Guidance Note 17 (Planning for Open Space, Sport and Recreation). Paragraph 14 of the guidance states that Allotments must not be regarded as previously developed land as defined in annex C of PPG3 - now superseded by annex B of PPS 3. In the annex to PPG17 it is stated that open space should be taken to mean all open space of public value and mentions allotments as such an example in sub section vii).

The Local Plan Policy is more specific and more detailed in respect of protection of important amenity areas, which include amongst others allotments. The policy states that permission will not be granted for proposals which would result in the loss of important amenity areas, but in exceptional circumstances, the loss may be permitted. These circumstances include situations where there is insufficient long term demand for the facilities or alternative provision is made elsewhere in an area which is accessible and provides equivalent community benefit. None of these situations applies to this proposal.

The applicants have provided additional information claiming that there is a misunderstanding with regards to the ownership of the land. They claim that the land is not allotment land in the normal sense of the word and that it is a privately owned garden land and not liable to public use. Whatever the case may be, the land has an - 4 -

established use as an allotment and whilst not designates as such in the local plan, it is nevertheless annotated as an allotment.

As part of the plan making process, the Council has prepared a Draft Allotment Strategy, which identifies that there is a good take-up of allotments and therefore a need to protect the existing provision. The increased population from the planned growth of Wellingborough may increase this demand further and this reinforces the need for protection of existing resources.

In support of their proposal, the applicants have also referred to the various national guidance and development plan policies that support the provision of additional residential units in the area. They also refer to the recent approved development on Eastfield Road, which is being built on a previous allotment land. It should be borne in mind that that site is specifically allocated for housing development in the Local Plan. Nevertheless, this and the other factors mentioned above, taken individually or collectively do not outweigh the need to protect this valuable natural green resource.

Flood Risk In respect of flood risk, the Environment Agency have raised objection to the proposal on grounds that a sequential test has not been applied to the proposal. The onus to apply sequential tests to developments in flood risk areas lies with the local planning authority. The aim of the Sequential Test, in summary, is to steer new development to areas at the lowest probability of flooding (see PPS25 paragraphs 16, 17 and D1-D8) and, therefore, in the first instance your Authority should apply the Sequential Test to this proposal and be satisfied that the principle of development is acceptable in this location from a flood risk perspective (a copy should be forwarded to the Environment Agency). However, in this instance, there is no need to apply the sequential test because: The proposed development is unacceptable in principle; and the site is neither a brownfield site nor a site designated for housing in the development plan. In the circumstances, it conflicts with several development plan policies. Furthermore, the Agency considers that the submitted Flood Risk Assessment is unacceptable, and this on its own constitutes a sufficient reason to withhold consent.

Planning Obligations Had the planning application been considered in a favourable light, its approval would have been subject to the completion of a Section 106 Agreement under the Act, to secure a range of community benefits and mitigate the impact on existing infrastructure. However, as consent is being declined and in anticipation that the applicant will likely appeal the decision, a third reason for refusal is recommended to safeguard the Council’s position at appeal.

RECOMMENDATION: Refuse Outline Permission for the following reasons:

1. The proposal would result in an unacceptable loss of an important amenity area and in the absence of a compensatory provision elsewhere in a suitable location, this conflicts with Policy 5 (a and b): (Green Infrastructure) of the North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy; Policy L5: (Important Amenity Areas) of the Wellingborough Local Plan; and Policy 28: (Regional Priorities for - 5 -

Environmental and Green Infrastructure) of the East Midlands Regional Plan. In the circumstances, the proposal would be inconsistent with the provisions in the national guidance PPG 15 (Planning for Open Space, Sport and Recreation). 2. The Flood Risk Assessment submitted with this application is unacceptable and does not comply with the requirements set out in Annex E, paragraph E3 of Planning Policy Statement 25 (PPS 25). The submitted FRA does not therefore, provide a suitable basis for assessment to be made of the flood risks arising from the proposed development. The absence of an adequate FRA is therefore sufficient reason in itself for a refusal of planning permission and the proposed development is therefore in conflict with Policy 13 (q) of the North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy and Policy G2 (Flood Protection) of the Wellingborough Local Plan. This reflects the precautionary approach to development in flood risk areas set out in paragraphs 10 and E9 of PPS 25. 3. In the absence of a planning obligation to secure community benefits and provide the necessary infrastructure to mitigate the adverse impacts of the development, the proposal is contrary to Policy 6 (Infrastructure Delivery and Developer Contributions) of the North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy.

POLICY G2 (Borough of Wellingborough Local Plan)

UNLESS FLOOD PROTECTION AND MITIGATION MEASURES APPROPRIATE TO COMPENSATE FOR THE IMPACT OF THE DEVELOPMENT ARE PROVIDED, PLANNING PERMISSION WILL BE REFUSED FOR DEVELOPMENT:

1. WITHIN THE FLOODPLAINS AS SHOWN ON THE PROPOSALS MAP; OR 2. IN OTHER AREAS AT RISK OF FLOODING; OR 3. WHICH WILL INCREASE THE RISK OF FLOODING ELSEWHERE; OR 4. RESULT IN PROBLEMS DUE TO ADDITIONAL SURFACE WATER RUN OFF.

POLICY L5 (Borough of Wellingborough Local Plan)

PLANNING PERMISSION WILL NOT BE GRANTED FOR PROPOSALS WHICH WOULD RESULT IN THE LOSS OF AN IMPORTANT AMENITY AREA. EXCEPTIONS MAY BE PERMITTED:

1. ON SITES WHICH ARE NOT IDENTIFIED AS ENVIRONMENTALLY IMPORTANT OPEN SPACE, PROVIDED THAT IT CAN BE ESTABLISHED THAT EITHER: A. THERE IS INSUFFICIENT LONG TERM DEMAND FOR THE FACILITIES, OR B. PROVISION IS TO BE MADE ON AN ALTERNATIVE AND APPROPRIATE SITE WHICH IS EASILY ACCESSIBLE AND PROVIDES EQUIVALENT COMMUNITY BENEFIT; AND 2. IN THE CASE OF THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT OF A SMALL PART OF AN IMPORTANT AMENITY AREA, WHERE THIS IS AGREED AS REPRESENTING THE BEST MEANS OF RETAINING SPORTS AND RECREATIONAL FACILITIES. - 6 -

Policy 5: Green Infrastructure

A net gain in green infrastructure will be sought through the protection and enhancement of assets and the creation of new multi functional areas of green space that promote recreation and tourism, public access, green education, biodiversity, water management, the protection and enhancement of the local landscape and historic assets and mitigation of climate change, along with green economic uses* and sustainable land management. Proposals affecting the Upper Nene Valley Gravel Pits proposed Special Protection Area will need to satisfy the tests of the Habitats Regulations in order to determine site specific impacts of development and to be able to identify and avoid or mitigate against impacts where identified. Access and recreation in this area will be managed in accordance with advice from Natural England.

Sub-Regional Green Infrastructure corridors will connect locations of natural and historic heritage, green space, biodiversity or other environmental interest. They will be safeguarded through: a) Not permitting development that compromises their integrity and therefore that of the overall green infrastructure framework; b) Using developer contributions to facilitate improvements to their quality and robustness;

Development will contribute towards the establishment, enhancement or ongoing management of a series of local corridors linking with the sub- regional corridors. Priorities for investment will be those areas where net gains in the range of functions can be improved, particularly those that improve access to the urban core and rural service centres and remedy local deficiencies in open space provision and quality.

Policy 6: Infrastructure Delivery and Developer Contributions

New development will be supported by the timely delivery of infrastructure, services and facilities necessary to provide balanced, more self-sufficient communities and to secure a modal shift away from car use and road freight haulage.

Progress on the delivery of strategic infrastructure will be monitored. Planning permission will be granted for development in accordance with phasing in the Core Spatial Strategy, subject to solutions to infrastructure constraints being resolved, or by interim measures or phasing conditions where appropriate. Development will be phased in relation to the delivery of infrastructure and/or performance against targets to reduce demands on infrastructure.

Developers will either make direct provision or will contribute towards the provision of local and strategic infrastructure required by the development - 7 -

either alone or cumulatively with other developments. These contributions will be negotiated between the developer and the local planning authority based on the Supplementary Planning Document for North Northamptonshire. For residential development, unless otherwise agreed, local infrastructure contributions will take the form of a standard charge per dwelling. In addition, unless otherwise agreed, a standard charge towards strategic infrastructure provision will apply to residential development, other than small scale 'rural exceptions' sites. The level and timing of this strategic infrastructure charge will vary dependent on the location, scale and financial viability of the development.

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:

Protect assets q) Not cause a risk to (and where possible enhance) the quality of the underlying groundwater or surface water, or increase the risk of flooding on the site or elsewhere, and where possible incorporate Sustainable Drainage Systems (SuDS) and lead to a reduction in flood risk.

Policy 28 (East Midlands Regional Plan)

Regional Priorities for Environmental and Green Infrastructure

Local Authorities, statutory environmental bodies and developers should work with the voluntary sector, landowners and local communities to ensure the delivery, protection and enhancement of Environmental Infrastructure across the Region. Such infrastructure should contribute to a high quality natural and built environment and to the delivery of sustainable communities.

Local Authorities and those responsible for the planning and delivery of growth and environmental management across the Region should work together to:

- increase access to green space that can be used for formal and informal recreation, educational purposes and to promote healthy lifestyles, without increasing pressures on sensitive sites, especially those designed under the European Habitats Directive.

- 8 -

BOROUGH COUNCIL OF WELLINGBOROUGH AGENDA ITEM

SITE VIEWING (Date of visit 3rd November 2009 at 10.15 a.m.)

Planning Committee 04/11/2009

Report of the Head of Built Environment

APPLICATION REF: WP/2009/0297/F

PROPOSAL: Change of use from a dwelling house to a residential care home for adults and people with learning difficulties - additional information.

LOCATION: 1 Poplar Street, Wellingborough. NN8 4PL

APPLICANT: Mr Mike Brennan, Delos Community.

This application is referred to the Planning Committee for determination at the request of Councillor Hawkes who also requests that the site be visited by the Site Viewing Group.

PROPOSAL AND DESCRIPTION OF SITE: As described above.

The application site is a large detached house set back from the road with a parking/turning area to the front.

The development in the area is mainly residential in character but nearby is The Avenue School and a number of other care homes. There are no parking restrictions in the highway directly to the front of the application dwellinghouse but there are parking prohibitions in the vicinity. Many of the dwellings locally do not have the benefit of off road parking spaces.

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY: No relevant history.

NATIONAL GUIDANCE AND DEVELOPMENT PLAN POLICY: Regional Spatial Strategy 8 North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy: 1 (Strengthening the network of settlements) 13 (General sustainable development principles) 14 (Energy efficiency and sustainable construction) 15 (Sustainable housing provision) Planning Policy Statement 1; Delivering Sustainable Development Planning Policy Statement 3; Housing Planning Policy Statement 9; Biological and Geological Conservation

2 O

2 1 A 8 D

0 2 4

0 5

1 WP/2009/0297/F 489200

M 893 an s

5 Rockdene 2 1

268400 T 268400 H 115 E 6a A

1 7 to 1 V 0 EE E Willdana 103 K STR N 6 PAR U AT 7 RE

8 1 1 G

E 9

B 76.2m 6 1 AK B

4 ER STR

4 EET 2

1 4

2 2 1

1 1 W orks

0 8 1 2

m 6

1 5 1 7 F BE a L c L t S

o 3 B TR r 0 E y ET

2 3

2 to 3

8 Pe 1 a rk ins C ourt

2 7

8 8

6 E 4 E R T S

( @ R A L P urt O Co The Avenue P Infant School

1 6 9 5 5 7 o t 683 683 4 52b 5 73a

52 4

a 3

3 o

7 5

1 5 0 2

17 2 Park House 4 b o 1 t

7a 1 7 Nursing Home 3 Bell Court

5 0 L REET ITTL K ST 9 E AR 2 3 P

6 2 61a

Sunnyville

P 19 A R 6 3 K 17 70.1m o t 5 R 1

4 B Park 9 8 a P 1

O 1 A 1

1 R t

T KC Tavern o

A 1

1 R 1

D EE E 8 R 1 S (PH)

ST 2 CE K NT

71.4m

3 OC B 2 L 0 ( 4 @ 6 E

1 LB b

AV 2

9 2

H 2 2 R ( PE UP 66.9m 1 T 6 R B E EGE E N T S 1 TRE 2 TR ET

S 2 Wellingborough Park 2

1 K 4 5

2 Junior School 1

14 A

682 8 682

a P

9 2

9 A 2

4 E 3

46 3

5 3 0

5 b 2 W 9 1 & 32 a D 9 E 1

1 9 4 1

3 8

2 1

1 8

1 1

Works 2

7 6 1 2 2 5 4 3 P B a r k

C 1 Pa o rk S u tree r Me t t thod 14 F ist a Ch

c 2 urc

h 6 t 2 1

o a

r 1 3

y 2 1 1 Manse Flats B 1 to 11 66.8m

Hall 26 1 33 1 10

T 4

he 0 3

1 Hall T B 19

ab ap T 2

ern ti E s 1 t E

ac R 9 T

le S 1 A 1 38 M AL

Garage 40 20 23 Church

Factory 9

1 2 268100 9 268100 6 ( 1 Club 1 to 55 (odd) @ 8 E

489200 AN 489400

1 L 6 S 893 ER s U 1 ork EQ 2 W CH 13 Scale 1:1250

TCB B62.6m 5 ( rt

n) ou

1 e 0 v C (e e s 4

4 ro 8 1 en to P 2 er nt Hu - 9 -

Supplementary Planning Document: Northamptonshire Minerals and Waste Development Framework – Development and Implementation Principles, Sustainable Design Supplementary Planning Guidance: Planning Out Crime and Parking.

SUMMARY OF REPLIES TO CONSULTATIONS/REPRESENTATIONS RECEIVED: The first publicity exercise that was undertaken resulted in a number of residents and the Avenue School expressing their concern and outright objection to the application for the following reasons:

• unsuitability of the dwellinghouse • antiquity of the local sewage system which will not be able to cope with the increased flow • responsibility for the party wall • effect on the quality of life of nearby residents • clause in the title deeds that may prohibit the proposed use • care home reports only give Delos Community an adequate rating • detrimental impact on prices of nearby properties • future number of residents • access difficulty for emergency service vehicles • traffic, parking and access difficulties due to constricted roads and excessive volume of vehicles, much of it associated with the school. Reference to amount of on street parking taken up by the existing nearby Delos workshop • incidents of vandalism to cars parked in The Avenue and Wellingborough is unsafe after dark • staff do not park off road but prefer to park in the street which will create more pressure on on-street parking spaces • taxis and mini buses drop off and pick up in the middle of the road from the existing Delos home. Taxis also block accesses • another care home will detrimentally affect the balance of care homes and other institutions locally. Concern that the area will become a collection of care homes which will become the predominant property use. Intensification of the home for special needs will have a severe detrimental effect on the character of the area • activities at the property give appearance that permission will be granted • statement by the applicant that the Avenue School is fully supportive of the application is not strictly accurate. The School is supportive of intention to work more closely with the Delos Community to include staff and residents in school events etc. • resident profile will not change and therefore will present no danger or upset to school pupils • noise emanating from another care home nearby • concern regarding the meaning of the term ‘learning difficulties’ • catalogue of incidents supplied regarding adequate supervision of residents of the existing Delos home • no previous problems or concerns with existing Delos home.

In response to the negative comments received, the applicant arranged a meeting for the concerned residents and also supplied additional information to further explain the application in an attempt to address the issues that had been raised. In response to the - 10 -

second round of publicity, objections have been maintained by the occupiers of 43 North Street; 4 Poplar Street and 27 Upper Havelock Street. Essentially, their reasons for opposing the application remain the same as stated above.

Peter Bone MP has been contacted by local residents and he has been furnished with the application details. The Member of Parliament has commented ‘although I believe that local issues should be decided by Councillors I also believe that constituents’ views and opinions need to be taken into consideration’.

The consultation response to the second round of publicity is summarized below.

1. Northamptonshire County Council Highway Authority –

“I refer to your letter of 29 September 2009 and note the response made by Mike Brennan on behalf of the Delos Community in respect of highway aspects of the application. From his comments I am satisfied that the use will not result in a material increase in usage of the vehicular access to the property and would advise you that Northamptonshire County Council, as Highway Authority, does not wish to uphold an objection to the application on highway grounds.”

2. Care Quality Commission –

“The Care Quality Commission no longer requires planning permission sent to us by Local Borough Councils at the processing stage of an application prior to an interview with one of our Inspectors. Please find enclosed all the documentation sent to us. Please note that due to recent changes in the CQC we will no longer be commenting on planning permission.”

3. Wellingborough Council Environmental Protection Service –

“I write further to the above application for a change of use from a dwellinghouse to a residential care home for adults with learning difficulties. I understand that the issue of noise from the home has been raised, but I can confirm that there have been no complaints of the day to day operation of their similar facilities and we not object to the application.”

4. Wellingborough Council Housing Strategy - no comment received.

5. East Midlands Ambulance Service - no comment received.

6. Anglian Water Services - no comment received.

The Care Quality Commission has been requested in a letter dated 2 October 2009 to provide more information regarding the following issues:

• what are its licensing arrangements? • does the CQC have any criteria for site selection? • is the CQC the body to contact with concerns regarding the management of a care establishment?

- 11 -

At the time of writing the report no additional information had been received from the Care Quality Commission and in the absence of any extra detail the extract of information below was copied from its web site http://www.cqc.org.uk on 15 October 2009.

‘The Care Quality Commission is the new health and social care regulator for England. We look at the joined up picture of health and social care. Our aim is to ensure better care for everyone in hospital, in a care home and at home. We regulate health and adult social care services in England, whether they're provided by the NHS, local authorities, private companies or voluntary organisations. And, we protect the rights of people detained under the Mental Health Act.

We make sure that essential common quality standards are being met where care is provided and we work towards the improvement of care services. We promote the rights and interests of people who use services and we have a wide range of enforcement powers to take action on their behalf if services are unacceptably poor.

Our work brings together independent regulation of health, mental health and adult social care. Before 1 April 2009, this work was carried out by the Healthcare Commission, the Mental Health Act Commission and the Commission for Social Care Inspection. These organisations no longer exist.

Our main activities are:

• Registration of health and social care providers to ensure they are meeting essential common quality standards • Monitoring and inspection of all health and adult social care • Using our enforcement powers, such as fines and public warnings or closures, if standards are not being met • Improving health and social care services by undertaking regular reviews of how well those who arrange and provide services locally are performing and special reviews on particular care services, pathways of care or themes where there are particular concerns about quality • Reporting the outcomes of our work so that people who use services have information about the quality of their local health and adult social care services. It helps those who arrange and provide services to see where improvement is needed and learn from each other about what works best.

ASSESSMENT: Main Issues and Material Planning Considerations: • Compliance with policy • Effect on residential amenity • Highway safety • Crime and disorder • Biodiversity • Other issues

- 12 -

Compliance with policy There is now no specific development plan policy in place with regards to the provision of housing for special needs groups although NCSS Policy 15a states that ‘provision will be made for the delivery of a balanced mix of housing types and tenure’.

There is, however, general guidance contained in PPS 1 Delivering Sustainable Development which says the following in regard to social cohesion and inclusion.

‘14. The Government is committed to developing strong, vibrant and sustainable communities and to promoting community cohesion in both urban and rural areas. This means meeting the diverse needs of all people in existing and future communities, promoting personal well-being, social cohesion and inclusion and creating equal opportunity for all citizens. 15. Regeneration of the built environment alone cannot deal with poverty, inequality and social exclusion. These issues can only be addressed through the better integration of all strategies and programmes, partnership working and effective community involvement. 16. Development plans should promote development that creates socially inclusive communities, including suitable mixes of housing. Plan policies should: – ensure that the impact of development on the social fabric of communities is considered and taken into account; – seek to reduce social inequalities; – address accessibility (both in terms of location and physical access) for all members of the community to jobs, health, housing, education, shops, leisure and community facilities; – take into account the needs of all the community, including particular requirements relating to age, sex, ethnic background, religion, disability or income; – deliver safe, healthy and attractive places to live; and, – support the promotion of health and well being by making provision for physical activity.’

Annex C to PPS3 Housing, Evidence Base – Strategic Housing Market Assessments and Strategic Housing Land Availability Assessments - goes on to state that

‘Strategic Housing Market Assessments and Strategic Land Availability Assessments are an important part of the policy process. They provide information on the level of need and demand for housing and the opportunities that exist to meet it. Assessments should be prepared collaboratively with stakeholders. Where two or more Local Planning Authorities form a housing market area, Local Planning Authorities should work together either by preparing joint assessments or by ensuring consistency in methodology. Practice guidance will set out detailed methodologies for carrying out these assessments.’

A Strategic Housing Market Assessment should:

– Estimate housing need and demand in terms of affordable and market housing. – Determine how the distribution of need and demand varies across the plan area, for example, as between the urban and rural areas. - 13 -

– Consider future demographic trends and identify the accommodation requirements of specific groups such as, homeless households, Black and Minority Ethnic groups, first time buyers, disabled people, older people, Gypsies and Travellers and occupational groups such as key workers, students and operational defence personnel.

In the absence of any specific development plan policy relating to providing housing for special needs groups the proposal will have to be judged purely on its merits. It is considered that the principle of the proposal, in terms of land use, is acceptable because the site is relatively close to the town centre with the amenities it has to offer and could help to integrate the potential residents into the community.

Other more specific issues of policy are discussed below.

Effect on residential amenity Policy 13(l) of the North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy says that proposed development should 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.

The comments of respondents to the application are noted. It is considered, however, that the difference in the occupation pattern of a residential care of the intended scale of the proposal i.e. 5 bedrooms, when compared to the activity that could normally be expected from a dwellinghouse of its size, will not be so detrimentally intensive to recommend the application for refusal. It should perhaps be noted the Council’s Environmental Protection Service has not objected to the scheme and has identified that no noise complaints have been received regarding the existing nearby home.

Comments have been made regarding incidents of unsupervised care home residents in Poplar Street. Clearly, from the information gleaned form the CQC website, the issues involved with the management and running of the care home fall within its remit as regulator of the operation.

The concerns of local residents are noted, but it considered that the proposal will not create a use which would detrimentally affect the standards, to any material degree, of residential amenity that neighbours in the area currently enjoy to warrant recommending the application for refusal.

Highway safety Policy 13(d) of the North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy states that new development should have a satisfactory means of access and provide for parking, servicing and manoeuvring in accordance with adopted standards and Policy 13(n) goes on to say that development should not have an adverse impact on the highway network and will not prejudice highway safety.

It is accepted that the proposed development will generate traffic movements. However, the number of expected movements from the proposed use, over and above the current use of the property as a dwellinghouse, is likely to be relatively insignificant, especially when compared with the vehicular activity and associated traffic movements - 14 -

generated by the nearby school. Crucially, the Highway Authority has not objected to the application and the Ambulance Service has not responded to its consultation.

The traffic issues related to the ‘school run’ are not exclusive to The Avenue School and it is probable that if the development is approved any parking and access difficulties that may in the future be experienced in The Avenue would still most likely be attributable to the school. This would be as a direct result of the existing volume of movements generated by parents who opt to use their cars to drop off and pick up their children and try to get as close as possible to the school gate, presumably in efforts to save time on journeys to and from work and home.

The Northamptonshire County Council Education Department web page states that the academic year 2009 – 2010 will be 190 days long and there will also be 3 additional training days when pupils will not be required to attend school. If this information is expressed as a percentage of the days of the year when the schools are actually open it produces a figure of 51%. It should also be noted that during the normal school day there are usually two relatively short periods of time in which most of the traffic and parking congestion associated with a school occurs, apart from when parents’ evenings and school plays etc are scheduled.

Also, comments have been made regarding the incidence of accesses being blocked by taxis. It must be said that even taxi drivers are not exempt from the provisions of the traffic regulations and of the Highway Code. And taxis do have their registration number plates and their local authority plate numbers prominently displayed should residents feel sufficiently aggrieved to complain about their standard of driving or behaviour.

The existing access to the proposed development is considered to be safe. What perhaps is unsafe is the standard of parking of drivers for which there are powers vested in the Police and the County Council to control. The stance of the Highway Authority is clear and despite the comments lodged by local residents, it is considered that an objection to the proposal based on danger to highway safety is inappropriate.

With respect to parking that is on the zig-zag lines, yellow lines and on footpaths; these are offences under paragraphs 167, 213 and 218 respectively of The Highway Code and it is a matter for the Police and the County Council as parking authority to enforce against the offenders as necessary. Details of the way in which parking enforcement is controlled in the borough of Wellingborough can be found on www.northamptonshire.gov.uk/parking where a document entitled ‘Don't Get A Ticket’ can be down-loaded. The information includes a telephone number, 0845 6800153, and an email address [email protected] to which members of the public can report their parking concerns.

Crime and disorder Comments regarding vandalism and other incident are noted, as is the fact that writers say that the Police are aware of their concerns. It is acknowledged that the proposal may well exacerbate feelings of anxiety about crime and disorder issues, but it is considered that from the facts of the application the proposal will not materially impact on the crime and disorder issues in the locality.

- 15 -

Biodiversity No biodiversity issues have been identified within the scope of the application.

Other issues Comment has been lodged regarding the ability of the local sewerage system to cope with the proposed development, but noticeably, Anglian Water has not replied to its planning consultation. There is, therefore, no evidence from the statutory undertaker to suggest that the use of the property as proposed will overload the local sewers.

Conclusion There are residents who have expressed their objection and concern regarding the proposal and these views have been noted, taken into consideration and accorded some weight. It is considered, however, that the objections to the proposal should not be accorded sufficient weight to recommend refusal of the application.

RECOMMENDATION: Approve with conditions.

1. The development shall be begun not later than the expiration of three years beginning with the date of this permission. 2. The number of permanent residents domiciled in the care home shall be limited to no more five.

Reasons: 1. Required to be imposed pursuant to S51 of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004. 2. To regulate the number of residents who live in the care home.

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: Regional Spatial Strategy 8 North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy: 1 (Strengthening the network of settlements) 13 (General sustainable development principles) 14 (Energy efficiency and sustainable construction) 15 (Sustainable housing provision) Planning Policy Statement 1; Delivering Sustainable Development Planning Policy Statement 3; Housing Planning Policy Statement 9; Biological and Geological Conservation Supplementary Planning Document: Northamptonshire Minerals and Waste Development Framework - Development and Implementation Principles, Sustainable Design Supplementary Planning Guidance: Planning Out Crime and Parking. 2. The applicant is advised that this decision relates to the drawings received on 13 August 2009.

- 16 -

BOROUGH COUNCIL OF WELLINGBOROUGH AGENDA ITEM

SITE VIEWING (Date of visit 3rd November 2009 at 11.50 a.m.)

Planning Committee 04/11/2009

Report of the Head of Built Environment

APPLICATION REF: WP/2009/0306/F

PROPOSAL: Proposed new storage unit (to house plant and equipment for applicant's landscaping business) - amended plans.

LOCATION: Land adjacent 150 Wellingborough Road, Earls Barton, Northampton. NN6 0JS

APPLICANT: Mr J Blason.

NOTE: Planning Committee resolved to defer making a decision on the application at its meeting on 7 October 2009 to enable the following actions:

• officers to clarify the points raised by the applicant in the late correspondence; • the applicant to submit a revised proposal for re-consultation; • the Site Viewing Group to visit the site.

The applicant supplied a late letter which contained the following additional information and suggested amendments:

• willingness to reduce the height of the building by 1m. • proposed building will be screened by existing mature hedgerows and further screening is included on the front boundary which will remove the issue of impact of the development on the street scene. • no intention to store waste on the site and all waste material will be recycled at the local recycling plant. • negligible noise issue due to tractors and farm vehicles being used nearby which will generate more noise than van deliveries and picking up of machinery. • recognition that the site is outside the village policy line but there was previously a garage on the site and it should, therefore, be considered as previously developed land.

An amended plan (09/B167/1A) has been received on 12 October 2009 which illustrates a reduction in the height of the building by 1m. The applicant also makes reference in the covering letter to the screen planting at the front which is shown as approximately 2m high and states that it can be increased to totally screen the proposal.

500 4 A

Garage

(

B 89.6m

GP (

649 649 E

89.6m

1 lotment 5 0 ardens

Track

648 648

1 4 2

1 3 8

1 3 4

Cemetery Lodge

5 1

metery

( Chapel Wr Pt

1 264700 2 264700 8

485500 856 485700 Scale 1:1250

1 2 2 - 17 -

Another consultation and publicity exercise has been undertaken and the replies will be reported to Committee by way of the late letters list.

The applicant has undoubtedly tried to assuage the concerns that have been identified by the Parish Council and third parties, most noticeably by reducing the height of the building and by making reference to increased landscape planting to screen the development in the street scene. The applicant has also stated the opinion that the application site should be considered as brownfield land.

The efforts of the applicant to render the scheme more acceptable are noted, but the proposal would still result in a building with an overt industrial form incongruously appearing at the end of a row of dwellings. Also the policy issue is still problematic. This is because the application site remains outside the village policy line and should, therefore, be judged against the restrictive open countryside planning policies. It is accepted that the site may be brownfield in nature but this classification does not alter its location which is on the wrong side the Council’s own designated village policy line. The applicant has not supplied any evidence to show whether all the brownfield sites in the Borough have been exhausted and it is a view that the proposed use of the building would be more suited to a unit on an established industrial estate. Again, the applicant has not supplied any evidence to say that there are no suitable units available.

Should the application be approved it would in future be difficult to resist other applications that propose development outside the village policy line when there is evidenced to suggest that the Council has in the past been prepared to ignore its own adopted policy.

- 18 -

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

BOROUGH COUNCIL OF WELLINGBOROUGH AGENDA ITEM

Planning Committee 07/10/2009

Report of the Head of Built Environment

APPLICATION REF: WP/2009/0306/F

PROPOSAL: Proposed new storage unit (to house plant and equipment for applicant's landscaping business).

LOCATION: Land adjacent 150 Wellingborough Road, Earls Barton, Northampton.

APPLICANT: Mr J Blason.

This application is brought before the Planning Committee for determination due to an objection by the Earls Barton Parish Council.

PROPOSAL AND DESCRIPTION OF SITE: As described above. The dimensions of the building measure as 8m wide, 17m long and 5.2m high with the exterior material being metal cladding. In addition, the plans illustrate 2.1m high steel palisade fencing on the boundary.

The application site is a vacant area of land situated beyond the end of a run of dwellings towards the junction of Wellingborough Road and the A4500. On the opposite side of the road are allotment gardens.

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY: BW/1975/0394 Replace existing garage with new concrete garage – refused. BW/1975/0784 Replace existing garage with concrete garage – conditionally approved. BW/1978/0607 New pedestrian access to field – conditionally approved.

NATIONAL GUIDANCE AND DEVELOPMENT PLAN POLICY: Regional Spatial Strategy 8 North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy: Policy 8 (Delivering economic prosperity) 13 (General sustainable development principles) 14 (Energy efficiency and sustainable construction) Borough of Wellingborough Local Plan: G6 (Development within the open countryside) Planning Policy Statement 1; Delivering Sustainable Development Planning Policy Statement 7; Sustainable Development in Rural Areas - 19 -

Planning Policy Statement 9; Biodiversity and Geological Preservation Supplementary Planning Document; Northamptonshire Minerals and Waste Development Framework; Development and Implantation Principles Supplementary Planning Guidance: Parking and Planning Out Crime.

SUMMARY OF REPLIES TO CONSULTATIONS/REPRESENTATIONS RECEIVED: 1. Earls Barton Parish Council – objects to the application for the following reasons:

• the development is outside the village envelope • not in keeping with the adjacent residential properties and will have an adverse effect on the street scene • no indication regarding how tall the building will be.

2. Northamptonshire County Council Highway Authority – opines that there is insufficient information contained in the application with regards to:

• the mean of access • off-street parking/turning/manoeuvring requirements to enable vehicles to enter and leave in a forward direction • details of the number and nature of vehicles likely to park within the site

The Highway Authority also gives advice regarding:

• the acceptable access width • set back of gates to allow for the longest vehicle expected to access the site being able to stand clear of the highway • vehicular crossing to be in accord with County Council’s standards • the parking/turning area to be hard surfaced to prevent loose materials being carried out onto the highway

3. Northamptonshire Police Crime Prevention Design Advisor (CPDA) – states that the applicant has not sought any advice regarding crime prevention from the Police. The CPDA goes on to list a large number of issues that the applicant has not addressed.

4. Neighbours – objections have been received from the occupiers of 26 Spencer Close, 146 and 150 Wellingborough Road. The writers cite the following reasons for opposing the proposal:

• the proposed industrial type building is out of character with the area and would be better suited to an industrial estate • detrimental effect on the setting to an entrance into the village • danger to highway safety • noise emanating from the site • query regarding what waste will be on the site • site is outside the development area • loss of view • loss of property value • disruption for adjacent resident. - 20 -

ASSESSMENT: Material planning considerations: • Compliance with policy • Highway safety • Effect on the visual amenity of the area • Crime and disorder • Biodiversity

Compliance with policy The application has been advertised as being contrary to the provisions of the development plan. This is because the application site lies outside the Earls Barton village policy line and is, therefore, located in the open countryside. Policy G6.1 of the Borough of Wellingborough Local Plan is the prime policy to consider and it is reproduced below for ease of reference.

POLICY G6

DEVELOPMENT IN THE OPEN COUNTRYSIDE WILL NOT BE GRANTED PLANNING PERMISSION UNLESS:

1. IT CANNOT BE ACCOMMODATED OTHER THAN IN THE OPEN COUNTRYSIDE

The Design and Access Statement states that the building is to be used to store plant and equipment associated with the applicant’s landscape business. This is not considered to be an agricultural activity which can only be accommodated in the open countryside.

The proposal is, therefore, considered to be contrary to Policy G6.1 of the Borough of Wellingborough Local Plan because the building is intended to house equipment that is not directly related to agriculture and does not have to be located in the countryside.

Highway safety The Highway Authority has identified a number of deficiencies in the application regarding the details supplied regarding highway safety matters. It is considered that given enough time, and if the scheme were to be acceptable from a policy point of view, the highway difficulties could perhaps be adequately addressed. The Highway Authority has not, however, issued an outright objection to the scheme and it is suggested therefore that the number of issues it raises cannot be reasonably taken forward as a reason for refusal.

Effect on visual amenity 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, and respect and enhance the character of its surroundings. 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.

- 21 -

The development along the eastern side of Wellingborough Road has been described above and it is considered that the introduction of a building that will have an overt industrial appearance with it associated visually inappropriate boundary treatment would be an incongruous feature that would harm the visual amenity of the area.

The proposal is, therefore, considered to be contrary to Policy 13(h) of the North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy because it would introduce an incongruous feature into the locality by way of its industrial appearance and inappropriate boundary treatment which would have a detrimental effect on the quality of the visual amenity of the area.

Crime and disorder The North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy Policy 13(b) says that new 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 Police Crime Prevention Design Advisor has made a number of suggestions that would improve the standard of security for the proposed building and commented that certain aspects do not meet the Secured By Design criteria. It is considered, bearing in mind that the application is unacceptable in terms of policy, that it would be inequitable to ask the applicant to amend the scheme to take into account all the changes requested by the Police. It is considered that in contrast to the highway safety issues, the demonstrable lack of attention that has been paid to any crime prevention issues can be taken forward as an additional reason for recommending the application for refusal.

The proposal is, therefore, considered to be contrary to Policy 13(b) of the North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy because of the inadequate detail supplied regarding the need to prevent crime.

Biodiversity No biodiversity issues have been identified within the scope of the application.

Conclusion The application in the first instance is contrary to development plan policy and the applicant has not made available any information that has adequately challenged the primacy of the plan. In addition, the development would cause demonstrable harm to the visual amenity of the area and the issue of crime and disorder has been ignored.

The application is, therefore, recommended for refusal.

RECOMMENDATION: Refuse.

1. The proposal is contrary to Policy G6.1 of the Borough of Wellingborough Local Plan because the building is intended to house equipment that is not directly related to agriculture and does not have to be located in the countryside. 2. The proposal is contrary to Policy 13(h) of the North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy because it would introduce an incongruous feature into the - 22 -

locality by way of its industrial appearance and inappropriate boundary treatment which would have a detrimental effect on the quality of the visual amenity of the area. 3. The proposal is, considered to be contrary to Policy 13(b) of the North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy because of the inadequate detail supplied regarding the need to prevent crime.

POLICY G6

DEVELOPMENT IN THE OPEN COUNTRYSIDE WILL NOT BE GRANTED PLANNING PERMISSION UNLESS:

1. IT CANNOT BE ACCOMMODATED OTHER THAN IN THE OPEN COUNTRYSIDE.

Policy 13

Meet needs b) Seek to design out antisocial behaviour, crime and reduce the fear of crime by applying the principles of the 'Secured by Design scheme';

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: 09/B167/1 7 August 2009

- 23 -

BOROUGH COUNCIL OF WELLINGBOROUGH AGENDA ITEM

SITE VIEWING (Date of visit 3rd November 2009 at 11.20 a.m.)

Planning Committee 04/11/2009

Report of the Head of Built Environment

APPLICATION REF: WP/2009/0310/F

PROPOSAL: 1st floor extension to bedroom to front elevation. Rear conservatory to replace precast garage. Bay window to kitchen on side.

LOCATION: 81 John Gray Road, Great Doddington, Wellingborough. NN29 7TX

APPLICANT: Mr Nicholas Peasnell.

NOTE: This application was deferred at Planning Committee on 7th October 2009 to enable the Site Viewing Group to visit the site.

649 649

9 3

W IL

BY 44

7 2 LAN E

7 7

9 1 97

5 8

6 6

6 1

648 648

5 6

45 46

AD RO 11 Y El Sub Sta A

3 G 4

2 N H 16 O S J T N 6 IC

2 O 7 2 2 L 9 A 264700 S 264700

487700 487900 R 878 10 12 O Scale 1:1250 AD

10 5

4 - 24 -

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

BOROUGH COUNCIL OF WELLINGBOROUGH AGENDA ITEM

Planning Committee 07/10/2009

Report of the Head of Built Environment

APPLICATION REF: WP/2009/0310/F

PROPOSAL: 1st floor extension to bedroom to front elevation. Rear conservatory to replace precast garage. Bay window to kitchen on side.

LOCATION: 81 John Gray Road, Great Doddington, Wellingborough.

APPLICANT: Mr Nicholas Peasnell.

This application is brought before the Planning Committee for determination because of the level of objections from adjoining neighbours.

PROPOSAL AND DESCRIPTION OF SITE: The application property is semi-detached and is situated at the head of a short cul-de- sac. It has single storey rear and front extensions and a detached prefabricated garage located at the rear, along the eastern boundary. There is no established building line on this street such that the application site and its adjoining semi sit behind, and because of different ground levels, slightly above the adjoining 83 John Gray Road. Permission is sought for a first floor extension above the existing front extension and a rear extension in place of the pre-fabricated garage. The front extension would be hipped and subservient to the existing dwelling house by virtue of a dropped ridge while the rear extension would be pitched with a rear gable. The latter would be 9.5m deep x 3.7m wide, slightly falling short of touching the rear boundary.

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY: WP/1995/0040 Dining room extension - approved with conditions. BW/1981/0132 Front porch/W.C. - approved with conditions. WR/1965/0143 Housing estate. WR/1965/0266 12 semi-detached bungalows, houses and garages - approved with conditions. WR/1965/0267 Layout of roads and sewers and subdivision of plots - approved with conditions.

NATIONAL AND LOCAL PLANNING POLICY: National Planning Policy Statement 1 (PPS1): Delivering Sustainable Development Borough Council of Wellingborough Local Plan - 25 -

Policies: G4 – Development within the Limited development and Restricted Infill Villages. North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy Policies: 13: General Sustainable Development Principles Supplementary Planning Guidance 11: Residential Extensions (a Guide to Good Design) Supplementary Guidance – Highway Authority Standing Advice.

SUMMARY OF REPLIES TO CONSULTATIONS/REPRESENTATIONS RECEIVED: 1. Neighbours – letters from nos. 79 and 83 John Gray Road and 29 Wilby Lane citing:

• Lack of numerical dimensional detail on the submitted drawings • Excessive scale of the rear extension (together with the existing) in relation to the plot size • Loss of views • Creation of an undesirable precedent • Loss of character resulting from building in front of the ‘building line’ and out of keeping with other properties • Loss of light and/or overshadowing • Overbearing and intrusiveness • Other reasons, e.g. that the rear extension is not consistent with a conservatory and questions about the integrity of the front extension footings, do not constitute proper planning issues.

2. Parish Council – no objections to the application.

3. Highways – regard to be had to the standards and conditions stated in the NCC document above.

4. Wellingborough Homes – no objections.

ASSESSMENT: The main issues to consider are the impact of the proposal on:

(i) the character and appearance of the area and existing property; and (ii) the amenities of neighbouring properties.

Character and Appearance of the area and existing dwelling house Policies G4 of the Local Plan and 13 of North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy both require new developments to be of a high standard of design and to take account of the character of the surroundings. The policies are amplified by the adopted SPG on Residential Extensions which gives guidance on acceptable designs.

The street has no distinct uniform architecture/character/overall symmetry and/or rhythm, which would justify protection in the interest of the public. Although the front extension would be visible from the public domain, its impact on the street would be muted having regard to its modest/proportionate scale and the subservient relationship with the existing property. The previous alterations to the property involving the front extension and bay windows on the front have already harmed the symmetry between - 26 - the pair, as such, the addition of a first floor as proposed would not materially alter the existing character as to be deemed obtrusive and/or incongruous. The siting of the property at the head of the cul-de-sac and behind no. 83 and the separation distance between the properties mitigate the extension’s overall impact on the street scene. It would be easy to sustain an objection on the grounds of harm to the street where the development concerned involved terraces. It is not accepted that the extension would be in front of the building line because it is evident that the general development in the area is discontinuous and that the application site as extended sits behind the adjoining property number 83.

In terms of its impact on the existing dwelling house, it is considered that the reduced height of the extension and its a hipped roof would respect the massing and proportions of the existing dwelling and would not create an unduly dominant or overbearing feature. Having regard to the above, it is considered that there exists no distinct harmony which, if disturbed, would adversely alter the character of the street scene and damage its overall appearance. Rather, the front extension would sit comfortably with the existing property in terms of size, height and overall design.

The rear extension would be set back from the front building line such that its overall impact on the street would be neutral. It is argued that the built up area would constitute more than 50% of the remaining plot size. This is refuted on the basis of the submitted plans. However, its size per-se would not matter but the implications in planning terms. These are discussed below.

Amenities of Neighbours SPG on residential extensions gives guidance on the relationship between properties in terms of loss of light, overshadowing and loss of outlook. It stipulates that single storey extensions should not project beyond a 60 degree line drawn from the mid point of the nearest ground floor window/opening of an adjoining property and 45 degrees in respect of first floor extensions. The extensions would certainly comply with the provisions in terms of the first floor element but would slightly fall short in respect of the rear element in relation to number 83. However, the oblique relationship between the two and the orientation of the properties in terms of aspect would mitigate the resultant impact. As such, the proposals would not result in a material loss of light and or overshadowing beyond a level which the neighbours would be generally expected to enjoy.

The maximum height of the rear extension would be 3.5m, short of 4m, the stipulated height for permitted developments involving pitched roofs. What would therefore be seen from rear gardens of adjoining properties would be the element above the 2m high hedges and closed boarded fences which would slope away from the boundaries. It is therefore considered that the height of the rear extension would not result in a significant loss of outlook.

It has been suggested that the developments would interfere with the outlook from the landing window of adjoining property number 83 but less weight is accorded to this having regard to the non-habitable nature of the ‘room’ involved. The alleged loss of views is a non-planning matter. Also, given the distances between the properties, it would be difficult to sustain the view that these extensions would be unduly intrusive and/or oppressive. - 27 -

The property sits on higher ground than those on Wilby Lane at the rear. There is a concern that these differences in height may result in loss of privacy given the proposed opening at the rear. This can be overcome by a condition requiring obscure glazing.

On the basis of the above, it is considered that the proposed extensions would not result in a significant reduction in the level of amenity that occupiers of the adjoining properties could reasonably expect to enjoy in a particular neighbourhood.

Highways There are no highway implications.

Conclusion The proposal would not harm the character of the area and the appearance of the existing property. It would not have an adverse impact on the amenities of neighbours in terms of loss of outlook and overshadowing. Therefore, planning permission should be granted.

RECOMMENDATION: Approve.

1. The development shall be begun not later than the expiration of three years beginning with the date of this permission. 2. The external walls and roof of the extensions shall be constructed with materials of the same type, texture and colour as the external walls and roof of the existing building. 3. Notwithstanding the submitted drawings, any window/opening in the north-east facing (rear) elevation of the rear extension shall be fitted with obscure glazing at all times.

Reasons: 1. Required to be imposed pursuant to S51 of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004. 2. In the interests of amenity. 3. To protect the amenities of properties backing onto the application site.

BOROUGH COUNCIL OF WELLINGBOROUGH AGENDA ITEM

SITE VIEWING (Date of visit 3rd November 2009 at 1.20 p.m.)

Planning Committee 04/11/2009

Report of the Head of Built Environment

APPLICATION REF: WP/2009/0319/F

PROPOSAL: Proposed detached dwelling house.

LOCATION: Land adjacent to 43 Norlinton Close, Orlingbury, Kettering. NN14 1FD

APPLICANT: Mr and Mrs M Alderman.

This application is referred to the Planning Committee for determination because a site viewing has been requested by the Parish Council.

PROPOSAL AND DESCRIPTION OF SITE: The application site adjoins a newly detached dwelling house situated on Taggies Yard, within Orlingbury Conservation Area (CA). It comprises the southern part of the site originally accommodating two cow sheds which have since been demolished. It is on the northern side of this site that the recently completed dwelling house sits. The site is in agricultural use, classified as Grade 3 on the Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food Agricultural Land Classification Map. The proposal site extends further south towards number 43 Norlinton Close and is separated from it by a small plot of land with the benefit of a planning permission for a detached garage belonging to the latter. Permission is sought to erect a two and half storeys detached dwelling house with an L- shape on the front. The new dwelling house would be, in layout terms, a mirror image of the adjoining dwelling house whose front projecting garage sits on the opposite end, thereby forming a courtyard between them. The new property would sit slightly in front of the adjoining property but roughly respecting its rear and roof lines. It would share a private access with the adjoining property gained from Norlinton Close.

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY: WP/2009/0295 Erection of a detached garage - approved. WP/2006/0453 Proposed replacement of existing approved timber windows with pvc-u - approved. WP/2005/0751 Residential development of 20 dwellings - approved. WP/2005/0750 Demolition of dwelling and agricultural buildings related to the residential development of the site - approved. WP/2004/0815 Demolition of dwelling and agricultural buildings – related to the residential development of the site - approved. WP/2004/0119 Residential development of 20 houses - approved. y

D 1 T D

H D E D

WP/2009/0319/FG 485900 8 D 486100 5

E B 1 2 860

N 272300 GP D 102.1m 272300 ( D 102.1m B N

D E 7

3a E 1 D

R D

2m a G 7 Orlingbury D E

H T@

(

B 7

3 10

7 0 9 .

0m 2 rd T 5 a A Y G s

G ie

g 1 I 1 g 1 D E a Gre

SY T a

A en 2

RD 15 Little w 2 oo

ds Barn

b 2

722 722 6

1 2

4 The 2 D A

Lodge O Church

ManorFarm 22 R 5 Farm Yd N Pond 6 2 DE

2 W

Manor Farm 20

1 RRO

3 4 A

H N B

O 97.5m

9 3 R L IN TO

CN L 1 O 5

721 SE 721

7 1

B 96.0m

2 1

272000 272000

485900 860 486100 Scale 1:1250 - 29 -

NATIONAL AND LOCAL PLANNING POLICY: National Planning Policy Statement 1 (PPS 1) - Delivering Sustainable Development. Planning Policy Statement 3 (PPS 3) - Housing. Planning Policy Statement 7 (PPS 7) - Sustainable Development in Rural Areas. Planning Policy Guidance 15 (PPG 15) - Planning and the Historic Environment. Borough Council of Wellingborough Local Plan G4 - Development within Limited Development and Restricted Infill Villages. North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy Policies: 13 - General Sustainable Development Principles. Northamptonshire Supplementary Planning Guidance (SPG) - Minor Applications that have an effect on the highway. Supplementary Planning Guidance: Building Better Places; Parking.

SUMMARY OF REPLIES TO CONSULTATIONS/REPRESENTATIONS RECEIVED: 1. Neighbours – no responses received.

2. Parish Council – the following should be noted: (i) Norlinton Close has restricted and hazardous access by way of Harrowden Road and increased traffic generated by additional development will add to this recognised hazard; (ii) the council would seek to be assured that this additional building would not contribute to overdevelopment of the site and pressure on services; (iii) any building would be in keeping in terms of style of building with surrounding housing and conditions of the CA; and (iv) any permitted building operations would conduct operations with the utmost regard for safety given the restricted width of access routes to the proposed site. In view of the potential dangers in terms of access to this site, a site visit is requested.

3. Highways – access to the proposed dwelling from Norlinton Close must be by way of a shared private drive having a width of 4.5m for the first 10m from the prospectively adoptable highway boundary. To prevent loose material being carried onto the prospective public highway, the communal part of the drive must be hard paved. To ensure that its future adoption is not prejudiced the applicant must gain the approval of the owner of the prospectively adoptable highway and construct the vehicular access into the shared private drive to appropriate standards. The applicant should be advised to discuss refuse collection aspects of the proposal with the appropriate officer of the Borough Council of Wellingborough.

4. Conservation Officer – concerned that it would be higher than no. 43 and asks that the chimney is built within the section of the gable and its crown thickened. The front door would benefit both architecturally and functionally from a porch canopy. Plastic windows are unsustainable and not traditional in a CA. Can timber as an alternative be considered?

5. Environmental Protection – the application site is located on or adjacent to the Northampton sand strata which may contain elevated levels of naturally occurring arsenic. A condition should be included in any approval that requires the further assessment of this matter. - 30 -

ASSESSMENT: The development plan consists of the saved policies of Northamptonshire County Structure Plan adopted in 2001 and Borough of Wellingborough Local Plan 1999 (Including Local Plan Alteration adopted in 2004); and North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy. Policy 13 of North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy sets out acceptability criteria for development proposals and indicates that developments should (a) meet needs (b) raise standards and (c) protect assets, whilst Policy G4 has a presumption in favour of developments in villages which do not adversely affect the character and setting of the villages. PPS 3 and PPS7 are in favour of the efficient and effective use of land, subject to other considerations, while PPS 15 seeks to preserve or enhance the character and appearance of CA.

The main issues would be:

(i) the principle of development; (ii) the impact of the proposal on the character and setting of the Conservation Area; (iii) amenities of neighbours and living conditions of future occupiers; and (iv) highway and pedestrian safety.

Principle of Development The site is within the Village Policy Line therefore suitable for development in principle, subject to compliance with the relevant provisions of the development plan pertaining to development in Villages, particularly G4. The principle is already established by the newly completed dwelling house adjoining the application site. The policy is pro- development so long as it does not affect the setting of the village. The position is reinforced in PPS3 and 7 which seek the efficient and effective utilisation of land.

Character and appearance of the Conservation Area The site lies within a CA; therefore the design of the new dwelling house assumes a high profile. The proposed development reflects the general style and appearance of the adjoining recently constructed dwelling house and others on Norlinton Close, although it has elaborate gable features on the front. Its height and scale would relate to the adjoining dwelling house, and not number 43 which sits further away in the south. The detail relating to the chimney and the front porch will be appropriately addressed by amended drawings. The resultant harmonious relationship between the properties is demonstrated by drawing 29/005/02 Rev B where the new dwelling house is shown to sit comfortably within the existing set up. In this respect, the development does not create visual incongruity within the CA and would not constitute overdevelopment as alleged by the Parish Council.

The closure of the gap between number 43 Norlinton Road and the newly constructed dwelling house by the proposed development and the recently approved detached garage provides physical and functional continuity which would enhance the character and appearance of the CA. It represents a natural extension to Norlinton Close.

In terms of detailed appearance, it is noted that natural limestone is proposed instead of the red bricks used on immediately adjoining properties. Granted, the appearance would detract from the existing but the design, including plinth brickwork and brickwork quoins to external corners, is a welcome relief to what would otherwise be the - 31 -

monotony often associated with mass building projects. The front gables are proportionate and not overly domineering. Overall, the proposed material would be suited to the CA. The choice of pvc windows is informed by the adjoining properties. The detail of the material will be treated by a condition, so will be matters relating to rainwater goods, material, eaves, chimneys, etc.

Neighbours’ Amenities and living conditions of future occupiers. The newly completed dwelling house has bathroom windows on the southern elevation, therefore would not be overshadowed. The proposed dwelling house has been designed in a way that retains openness at the frontage and reduces a domineering effect on the adjoining property. The slight forward projection in relation to the adjoining property is inconsequential in terms of loss of light and visual intrusion having regard to its depth. The impact of the proposal on number 43 will be lessened by the separation distance.

The property sits on a large plot, therefore affording the future occupiers ample amenity space.

Highway Implications The connection to Norlinton Close would be between no. 43 and 22. Highways have no objection in principle, subject to standard conditions relating to the design of the access road. The access point would be located away from the elevations of the said properties and the amount of traffic attributed to one dwelling house would not have a significant impact on the traffic situation in the area.

Conclusion The proposal would accord with the development plan in terms of efficient and effective utilisation of land and would not adversely affect the character and appearance of the CA. It would not have adverse impact on amenities of neighbouring properties and highway safety. The proposal is therefore recommended for approval.

RECOMMENDATION: Approve with 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. 3. Notwithstanding the submitted details, full constructional details of windows, doors, verges, chimney and rainwater goods shall be submitted for the written approval of the local planning authority before any such work is commenced. 4. The new stonework shall be laid in level courses with a mortar mix normally comprising either hydraulic lime or lime putty (to BS 890) and well-graded and washed sharp sand to a ratio of 1:3 by volume, and with the mortar brushed back to the back arrises of the stonework whilst still green. This mix and finish shall be used for any repointing work. 5. Details of the boundary treatments shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority prior to commencement of the development. The works shall have to be carried out in accordance with the approved details. - 32 -

6. Notwithstanding the submitted Environmental Risk Assessment, and before development commences, further detailed investigation shall be carried out to establish if the site is contaminated with naturally occurring arsenic. This assessment, together with details of the remedial measures, shall be submitted to and approved by the local planning authority in writing, and the development shall then proceed in strict accordance with the measures approved. 7. Access from Norlinton Close shall be by way of a shared private drive with a minimum width of 4.5m for the first 10m from the highway boundary and the communal part of the drive shall be hard paved to prevent loose material being carried onto the highway.

Reasons: 1. Required to be imposed pursuant to S51 of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004. 2. In the interests of preserving or enhancing the character and appearance of the Conservation Area. 3. In the interests of preserving or enhancing the character and appearance of the Conservation Area. 4. To ensure quality development in the interest of the visual amenity of the Conservation Area. 5. To ensure satisfactory boundary treatments of the site in the interests of visual amenity and character and appearance of the Conservation Area. 6. To avoid any additional effects from contamination. 7. In the interests of highway safety.

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: 13 (General Sustainable development principles) of North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy and G4 (Development within Limited Development and Restricted Infill Villages) of the Borough of Wellingborough Local Plan. 2. No works may commence within the existing highway without the express written permission of the Highway Authority. This planning permission does not give or infer such consent. However, such consent may be forthcoming subject to the completion of a suitable licence or agreement under Highways Act 1980. Any works within the highway shall comply with NCC specifications. 3. The applicant is advised that this decision relates to the following drawing numbers received on the date shown: Drawing Numbers: Date Received: 29/005/02B and 03C 22.10.2009

- 33 -

BOROUGH COUNCIL OF WELLINGBOROUGH AGENDA ITEM

SITE VIEWING (Date of visit 3rd November 2009 at 12.20 a.m.)

Planning Committee 04/11/2009

Report of the Head of Built Environment

APPLICATION REF: WP/2009/0336/F

PROPOSAL: Rear two storey extension with balcony above on outline of existing conservatory.

LOCATION: 4 Kings Lane, Little Harrowden, Wellingborough. NN9 5BL

APPLICANT: Mr Stuart McLester.

PROPOSAL AND DESCRIPTION OF SITE: The application property is situated within the village of Little Harrowden. It sits adjacent a public footpath which bounds the northern and eastern boundary and backs onto the open countryside. Permission is sought for a flat roofed two storey rear extension with a balcony. A 1m high parapet would enclose the balcony. The extension would take the outline of the existing rear conservatory.

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY: WP/2000/0633 Erection of 2 houses - approved. BW/1980/0169 Car showroom and alterations to existing vehicular access - approved. WR/1970/0086 Workshop, spray and store - approved. WR/1969/0131 Extension to petrol filling station - approved.

NATIONAL AND LOCAL PLANNING POLICY: North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy Policy: 13: General Sustainable Development Principles Supplementary Planning Guidance 11: Residential Extensions (a Guide to Good Design) Borough Council of Wellingborough Local Plan G4: Developments in limited development and restricted infill villages

SUMMARY OF REPLIES TO CONSULTATIONS/REPRESENTATIONS RECEIVED: 1. Neighbours – no responses received.

2. Ramblers Association – no responses received.

3. Highways County – regard to be had to the standards and conditions in the NCC document ‘Highway Authority Standing Advice’. WP/2009/0336/F 486800 © Crown Copyright. All rights reserved. 487000 Borough Council Of Wellingborough: Licence No.100018694. Published 26/10/2009 869 271700 271700

716 716

P E A RT 6 R 63 E

E 59 4 F A RM 53 574 CL B

Pond

Dairy Cottage 1 1 2

4 PO 4 7 5

den 6 B

B 1 88.4m

715 715

3 16 2

18 6

7 3

9 3

22 7 15

34 1 3 TO W @ 1 ( S N M C 5 IT 7 E H 2 L AN S L Y O G'S A 3 S

KIN R 2

D 2 E 0

T 8

E 2

RE 1 T S

7 1 IN

A M 1

B 2 West Farm 87.8m 271400 271400

1 486800 487000 8 Works 869 32 S O 4. Scale 1:1250 L 4 C m 28 B 10 TO

W WN

55 4 4 N O 2

C T 2 LO S - 34 -

4. NCC Rights of Way Officer – no responses received.

ASSESSMENT: The main issues to consider are the impact of the proposal on:

(i) the character and appearance of the area and existing property; and (ii) the amenities of neighbouring properties;

Character and Appearance of the area and existing dwelling house The proposed extension would be seen from the public footpath running along and across the side and rear boundaries respectively. The main dwelling house is gabled and assumes a conventional rectangular shape. The proposed flat roofed two storey rear extension with a parapet projecting above the sloping angles of the main roof would be an incongruous addition to the main dwelling house. As seen from the adjoining public footpath, the proposed fenestration comprising a combination of different sized windows and patio doors would look unsympathetic both in aesthetic and proportional terms while the predominantly solid parapet wall would give an impression of a disproportionate increase in the massing of the main dwelling house. This would be harmful to the visual amenities of the area, contrary to Policy 13 of the Core Spatial Strategy and detailed design guidance contained in the SPG ‘Residential Extensions’. PPS1 dissuades local authorities from prescribing design tastes but requires design considerations to control, among other things, the overall scale, layout, density, massing and height of the proposed developments. The design of the rear elevation lacks proportion and coordination in respect of these themes. Significant weight is accorded to the adjoining footpath which affords the public unrestricted views of the development.

Amenities of Neighbours No. 8 sits west of the application site and has a ground floor window on the facing elevation which serves a habitable room. The neighbours have not objected but it is considered that the extension would bring the rear windows much closer to the neighbour’s window with the effect that overlooking might intensify. The balcony also creates prospects of noise from prolonged use which would adversely harm the residential amenities of the neighbouring property. If permission is granted, it would be difficult to control these aspects by means of conditions.

Conclusion By virtue of design and siting, the proposed extension would have a detrimental impact on the appearance of the dwelling house and would lead to loss of privacy and general disturbance to the adjoining property number 8. This would be detrimental to the visual amenities of the area and to the living conditions of the occupiers of the adjoining property. Planning permission should therefore be refused.

RECOMMENDATION: Refuse.

1. The proposed development would be out of scale and character with the existing dwelling house and would detract from its appearance, which would thereby be - 35 -

detrimental to the vuis\ual amenities of the local area as seen from the adjoining public footpath. This would be contrary to Policy 13 (General Sustainable Development Principles) of North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy. 2. The proposed development would injuriously affect the amenities of the adjoining property number 8 Kings Lane by reason of overlooking, noise and general disturbance. This would be contrary to Policy 13 (General Sustainable Development Principles) of North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy.

Policy 13: General Sustainbale Development Principles

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;

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: 0921/5 and 0921/6 27th August 2009

- 36 -

BOROUGH COUNCIL OF WELLINGBOROUGH AGENDA ITEM

SITE VIEWING (Date of visit 3rd November 2009 at 1.50 p.m.)

Planning Committee 04/11/2009

Report of the Head of Built Environment

APPLICATION REF: WP/2009/0378/F

PROPOSAL: Proposed conversion/alteration/extension of existing brick barns (2 storey) and construction of new garage within the property boundary.

LOCATION: 1 Mill Lane, Isham, Kettering. NN14 1HN

APPLICANT: Mr and Mrs Andrew & Jacqueline Johnson.

This application is referred to the Planning Committee for determination due to the level of third party objection. In addition, the Parish Council has requested that the site be visited by the Site Viewing Group.

PROPOSAL AND DESCRIPTION OF SITE: As described with the proposed garage located at the front of the dwellinghouse. The garage has a footprint of 4.7m x 6.7m; the flat roof measures as 3m above ground level at the access and plan no. JOHNO 003 also illustrates a 1.15m high parapet wall. The building specification submitted with the application states that the roof of the garage will be covered with pre-cast concrete paving slabs or balcony tiles. Also illustrated is the building up of a section of the front boundary wall to join the garage.

The application site is a semi-detached cottage with attached barns that have attractive fenestration detail. At the rear of the site is the Lilacs Public House car park and its beer garden is to the side. The front boundary wall of the public house wraps around the corner of the junction and attaches to the lower height front boundary wall of the application property, which also acts as a retaining wall. On top of the lower part of the wall is a mature hedge and the application site has the benefit of an unmade access and off road parking area. The highway does not have a footway and peters out some 130m to the northeast, but the highway continues on towards Burton Latimer in the form Public Right of Way TM11.

The application dwelling and the adjoining property are set back from the road as are numbers 9 and 11 Mill Lane. The front gardens of these dwellings in this stretch running down to The Millglade do have a degree of landscape planting but they are, nonetheless, characterised by their openness and lack of buildings.

15 5

T H E

M 9 D IL L G

L 741 1 A 741 D The E Lilacs E N A (PH) 1 L 1 L IL M

e 3

33 35 1

6 2

0 3

2 5 3 S O 43 UT T 5 0 9 S H 3 LE D S ID T 740 M 740 4 6 All Saints House

3 8

3 r 6 a ( a c e 15 LB

E 7

6 b 5 9 7 T EE

STR 2

3 UTH 8 273900 SO 273900

488700 888 488900

1 8 Scale 1:1250 P ath (um) - 37 -

The ground level of the area generally falls down from the southwest to the northeast and this slope is reflected in the form of the land in the front garden which is noticeably higher than the highway.

An additional plan was received on 13 October 2009 which illustrates the existing and proposed rear elevation that was not submitted originally with the application.

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY: None.

DEVELOPMENT PLAN POLICY AND NATIONAL GUIDANCE: Regional Spatial Strategy 8 North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy: 1 (Strengthening the network of settlements) 13 (General sustainable development principles) 14 (Energy efficiency and sustainable construction) Planning Policy Statement 1; Delivering Sustainable Development Planning Policy Statement 3; Housing Planning Policy Statement 7; Sustainable Development in Rural Areas Planning Policy Statement 9; Biodiversity and Geological Conservation Planning Policy Guidance 13; Transport Supplementary Planning Document: Northamptonshire Minerals and Waste Development Framework – Development and Implementation Principles Supplementary Planning Guidance: Planning Out Crime, Parking and Residential Extensions - A Guide to Good Design.

SUMMARY OF REPLIES TO CONSULTATIONS/REPRESENTATIONS RECEIVED: 1. Isham Parish Council –

“The Parish Council are concerned about the siting of the garage and access to the highway and would like to request a site viewing.”

2. Northamptonshire County Council Highway Authority –

“I refer to your letter of 1 October 2009 and, because of the generally minor nature of the proposals, return the above application with a sticker. It is a requirement of Northamptonshire County Council, as Highway Authority, that the front face of a garage must be set back a minimum distance of 5.5m from the highway boundary and the application cannot, therefore, be supported on highway grounds.”

3. Neighbours – objections have been received from the occupiers of 3 and 9 Millglade; 3 Mill Lane and 46 South Street. The objectors view is that the proposed garage is on a dangerous blind bend in the road and will have no visibility. This will present a hazard to highway safety due to the amount of vehicles, pedestrian and dogs that use the road.

ASSESSMENT: The material planning considerations are: • Effect on the street scene • Highway safety - 38 -

• Effect on neighbours amenities • Crime and disorder • Biodiversity

Effect on the street scene Policy 13 (h) of The North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy says new development should be of a high standard of design that enhances the character of its surroundings. The requirement for designs that contribute positively to their surroundings and which are appropriate to their context is also mentioned in paragraph 34 of PPS 1.

The Borough Council of Wellingborough has expanded upon the above policy context with respect to house extensions by adopting the Supplementary Planning Guidance entitled Residential Extensions - A Guide to Good Design. It is considered that the design of the dwelling extension is acceptable because its design is complimentary to the original dwellinghouse.

With regards to the proposed garage the site is not viewable by vehicular through traffic, but it is situated on a pedestrian route into the village. It is accepted that there may be examples of buildings built upto the back edge of the highway elsewhere in the village, and the proposed garage may not be particularly visible when approached from the west, but it is considered that approving this element of the scheme would result in an incongruous feature appearing in the street scene if seen from a north easterly direction. This would be due to the proposed building presenting a mass of brickwork with a height of some 4m high at the back edge of the highway. The discord in the street scene that would result from the development is, therefore, contrary to Policy 13 (h) of the North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy.

Highway safety Policy 13 (d) of the North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy states that new development should have a satisfactory means of access and provide for parking, servicing and manoeuvring in accordance with adopted standards and Policy 13 (n) goes on to say that development should not have an adverse impact on the highway network and will not prejudice highway safety.

Neighbours and the Parish Council have stated their opinions that the proposed development will create a source of highway danger. The Highway Authority does not support the application and mentions its normal requirement for a garage door to be set back 5.5m from the back edge of the highway. This set back distance is necessary to enable a car to pull off of the road and allow for the driver to open the garage door without the rear of the car overhanging the highway and causing a danger to highway traffic. It is noted that there is an annotation on the plans that says that the door could be either an up and over or a roller shutter design but, the intended position of the garage directly at the back edge of the highway, would involve a vehicle waiting in the highway on a bend, for the driver to open the garage door, whatever its configuration.

The proposed garage is, therefore, considered to be contrary to Policies 13 (d) and 13 (n) of the North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy because its position at the back edge of the highway would create a potential source of highway danger.

- 39 -

Effect on neighbours’ amenities Policy 13 (l) of the North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy says that proposed development should 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. It is envisaged that the proposed extension to the dwelling will not have any significant effect on the standard of residential amenity currently enjoyed by the occupiers of the nearby dwellinghouses due to the front windows facing out over the applicants’ own front garden and highway, and the rear windows overlooking a pub car park.

With regards to the proposed garage, however, there are issues relating to potential loss of residential amenity. This is because the garage roof is designed to act as a balcony area which would be 3m above the ground floor level. When the roof of the garage is in use as a balcony it will be possible for residents making use of its elevated position to look down into the front windows of the adjoining dwelling which would result in an unduly uncomfortable living conditions for the neighbouring occupiers.

The proposed garage is, therefore, considered to be contrary to policy 13 (l) of the North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy because it would have an unacceptable impact on the amenities of the occupiers of the no. 3 Mill Lane by way of its overbearing impact and loss of privacy.

Crime and disorder There are no pertinent crime and disorder issues relevant to the determination of the application.

Biodiversity No biodiversity issues have been identified within the scope of the application.

Conclusion: The scheme is considered not to be acceptable because of its harmful effects on the street scene, detrimental effect on the standard of amenity enjoyed by the neigbouring residential occupiers and potential to create a source of highway danger. The Council cannot issue a split decision i.e. by approving one part of a scheme and approving another element, the application as a whole is, therefore, recommended for refusal.

RECOMMENDATION: Refuse for the following reasons:

1. The proposed garage by way of its unsympathetic design, size and location would appear as a discordant feature in the street scene and is contrary to Policy 13 (h) of the North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy. 2. The proposed garage is contrary to Policies 13 (d) and 13 (n) of the North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy because its position at the back edge of the highway would create a potential source of highway danger. 3. The proposed garage is contrary to Policy 13 (l) of the North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy because it would have an unacceptable impact on the amenities of the occupiers of the no. 3 Mill Lane by way of its overbearing impact and loss of privacy. - 40 -

Policy 13

Meet needs d) Have a satisfactory means of access and provide for parking, servicing and manoeuvring in accordance with adopted standards;

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; n) Not have an adverse impact on the highway network and will not prejudice highway safety.

INFORMATIVE: The applicant is advised that this decision relates to the following drawing numbers received on the dates shown: Drawing Numbers: Date Received: JOHNO001, JOHNO002 and JOHNO003 1 October 2009 JOHNO004 13 October 2009

- 41 -

BOROUGH COUNCIL OF WELLINGBOROUGH AGENDA ITEM

Planning Committee 04/11/2009

Report of the Head of Built Environment

APPLICATION REF: WP/2009/0365/C

PROPOSAL: Erection of new industrial building and installation of 3MW biomass fuelled power plant.

LOCATION: Larner Pallets, 32-50 Rixon Road, Wellingborough. NN8 1QW

APPLICANT: Mr John Berry, Climate Corporate Advisory Service LLP.

The proposal is a County matter and the application is referred to the Planning Committee as a consultee.

PROPOSAL AND DESCRIPTION OF SITE: As described above. The operation is a 24 hours a day process and includes the following buildings and plant:

• 12m high building with a footprint of 55m x 30m, with 9m high eaves • cooling tower and fans – height will be below the eaves of the new building • electricity substation • relocated portakabin • 15m high gas engine exhaust stack • reinforced concrete retaining wall • external floodlights – location to be agreed with relevant local planning authority

The plant will be fuelled by reclaimed wood from the existing operations on site. The proposal will supply a source of renewable energy to the national grid equivalent to the annual usage of over 7,000 households. Whilst the biomass fuelled electricity generation plant will operate 24 hours per day, the associated receipt of wood, its handling and processing operations on site are proposed to be restricted to day-time hours only. This latest application is made because of a change in the technology proposed, i.e. from gasification (as detailed in WP/2008/0320/C) to a turbine based boiler system.

The application site is an existing wood waste recycling centre located in the heart of the Finedon Road Industrial Estate. To the rear of the site is a corridor of land that is designated in the local plan as G19 and L5 - Environmentally Important Open Space and Important Amenity Area. WP/2009/0365/C 490000 © Crown Copyright. All rights reserved. 490200 Borough Council Of Wellingborough: Licence No.100018694. Published 20/10/2009 901 El Sub Sta Silos 269600 269600 D 2

5 5

6 Y

Bevan Court

695 695

O N R O AD

B 51.6m E S

El Sub Sta

B 51.2m @

(

B 49.8m

B 49.1m 694 9 694

Co nve yor El Sub Sta

Finedon Road Industrial Estate

269300 269300

490000 901 490200

Scale 1:1250 H - 42 -

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY: WP/2000/0365/C Change of use – waste land to wood waste recycling centre – approved with conditions (County Council determination).

WP/2008/0320/C Erection of new industrial building and installation of 3MW biomass gasification plant to generate electricity from reclaimed timber – approved with conditions (County Council determination).

NATIONAL, REGIONAL AND LOCAL PLANNING POLICY: National and Regional Policy. As this application is being determined by the County Council then compliance with national and regional policies rests with the County Council. The applicant has indicated that the proposal accords with the following policies:

Planning Policy Statement 10 – Planning for Sustainable Waste Management Planning Policy Statement 22 – Renewable Energy Regional Spatial Strategy 8 – Policies 18, 20, 38, 39 and 40. Milton Keynes and South Midlands Sub-Regional Strategy – Policy 3.

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

Wellingborough Local Plan (including Alteration 2004) 1999 - policies: • G2 – Flood Protection; • G19 – Environmentally Important Open Space; • L5 – Retention of Important Amenity Areas.

North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy 2008 – policies: • Policy 1 – Strengthening the Network of Settlements; • Policy 9 – Distribution and Location of Development; • Policy 11 – Distribution of Jobs; • Policy 13 – General Sustainable Development Principles; • Policy 14 – Energy Efficiency and Sustainable Construction.

SUMMARY OF REPLIES TO CONSULTATIONS/REPRESENTATIONS RECEIVED: Wellingborough Council Planning Policy Service – no comment received at time of writing this report.

ASSESSMENT: The material planning considerations are: • Compliance with policy; • Other material planning matters.

Compliance with policy It is considered that the principle of the development which proposes to utilize waste wood recovered from the existing enterprise on the site is sound and in accord with development plan policy. Other aspects of the scheme are, however, highlighted below. - 43 -

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

• Pollution control (including dust, noise); • Hours of working; • Effect on residential amenities; • Effect on visual amenity; • Highway safety and parking; • Crime and disorder; • Biodiversity.

Conclusion Subject to adequate enforcement of the pollution control regulations and appropriate use of planning conditions to mitigate any perceived issues relating to the proposed material planning matters above, there are considered to be no substantive reasons to object to the grant of planning permission for the development as proposed.

RECOMMENDATION: Offer no objection to the proposal subject to appropriate pollution control measures being applied.

- 44 -

BOROUGH COUNCIL OF WELLINGBOROUGH AGENDA ITEM

Planning Committee 04/11/2009

Report of the Head of Built Environment

APPLICATION REF: WP/2009/0395/OB

PROPOSAL: Erection of 7 no. wind turbines (100m high to the tip of a rotor blade in a vertical position). Provision of crane hardstandings, 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: New Albion Wind Farm, Towns Close Farm (land at), Rushton.

APPLICANT: Infinergy Limited.

The proposal is a Kettering Borough Council matter and the application is referred to the Planning Committee as a consultee.

PROPOSAL AND DESCRIPTION OF SITE: As described above.

The site is located within the Borough of Kettering and in the Parish of Rushton. The site is located between Rushton and Pipewell and is currently used as arable farmland. It is bounded by farmland, a parcel of woodland and rural roads.

The proposed development will consist of:

• 7 wind turbines of up to 100m high to tip at their highest point and each with a generating capacity of up to 2.3 megawatts (MW) of electricity; • Ancillary development comprising a widened site access, site access tracks, crane pads, underground electrical cabling, control building and substation, and a permanent anemometry mast of a height equivalent to hub height of the proposed turbines (65m); and • A temporary construction compound.

It is proposed to use turbines of up to 2.3 MW installed capacity. They would be three- bladed horizontal axis machine with a maximum hub height of 65m, and a maximum overall height of 100m. The wind turbine blades would be constructed from a glass fibre and epoxy composite material. The towers are of a modular steel construction. - 45 -

Most wind turbines in the UK are generally a light to mid grey tone in order to blend in with the colour of the sky, which represents the background to the wind turbines from most views. They are also less distinct compared with white turbines from short and particularly long distances. There is a range of coloured tones available from the different turbine suppliers and the applicant has advised they would liaise with Kettering District Council in order to determine the colour once the turbine supplier has been confirmed. This can be dealt with by an appropriate planning condition.

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY: None as this site lies outside the administrative boundary of Wellingborough Borough Council

NATIONAL, REGIONAL AND LOCAL PLANNING POLICY: National and Regional Policy. As this application is being determined by Kettering Borough Council then compliance with national and regional policies rests with Kettering. The applicant has indicated that the proposal accords with the following policies: Planning Policy Statement 1 – Delivering Sustainable Development Planning Policy Statement 1 – Planning and Climate Change – Supplement to PPS1 Planning Policy Statement 7 – Sustainable Development in Rural Areas Planning Policy Statement 9 – Biodiversity and Geological Conservation Planning Policy Guidance15 – Planning and the Historic Environment Planning Policy Guidance 16 – Archaeology and Planning Planning Policy Statement 22 – Renewable Energy

East Midlands Regional Plan 2009 (replacing RSS8) – Policies 24, 26, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 35, 36 and 40.

East Midlands Regional Energy Strategy (Part1, 2004 and Part 2, 2007) – ENG10.

Milton Keynes and South Midlands Sub-Regional Strategy – Policy 3.

Local Policy The relevant local planning policies with which this consultation response report concerns itself with are detailed below. North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy 2008: • Policy 5 – Green Infrastructure; • Policy 6 – Infrastructure Delivery and Developer Contributions; • Policy 13 – General Sustainable Development Principles; • Policy 14 – Energy Efficiency and Sustainable Construction.

SUMMARY OF REPLIES TO CONSULTATIONS/REPRESENTATIONS RECEIVED: 1. Wellingborough Council Planning Policy Service – no comment received at time of writing this report.

2. Wellingborough Council Landscape Officer – no comment received at time of writing this report.

- 46 -

3. Wellingborough Council Conservation Officer – no comment received at time of writing this report.

ASSESSMENT: The material planning considerations are: • Compliance with policy; • Other material planning matters.

Compliance with policy It is considered that the principle of the development which proposes to construct a renewable energy source within the open countryside is sound and in accord with Core Spatial Strategy (CSS) development plan policy. For clarity, this conclusion is elaborated as follows.

CSS, Policy 5. It is opined that the proposal would not compromise the integrity of existing or proposed green infrastructure corridors. It is feasible for Kettering Borough Council (KBC) to seek developer contributions to facilitate improvements to the quality and robustness of green corridors.

CSS, Policy 6. The scale of the development would lend its self well to KBC seeking developer contributions to either make direct provision or contribute towards the provision of local and strategic infrastructure as alluded to in the preceding paragraph.

CSS, Policy 13. The general sustainable development principles cited in Policy 13, whilst no specific reference is made to wind farms, would support this type of proposal in so far as it would not result in an unacceptable impact of the amenities of properties in the wider area; be constructed and operated using a minimum amount of non- renewable resources; not have an adverse impact on highway network; would not have an adverse impact on the landscape character; would not sterilise known mineral reserves; would not cause a risk to water resources or increase the risk of flooding.

CSS, Policy 14. Whilst the policy does not specifically refer to wind farm proposals, the concept of development meeting viable standards of resource and energy efficiency and reduction of carbon emissions can be reasonably inferred to be applicable to this proposal. Indeed, paragraph 4.14 of the CSS, which provides the background commentary to Policy 14, supports the notion that “It has been established that in…a generally rural area, there are some opportunities for wind energy development…it is anticipated that new wind energy development proposals…will, in principle, be considered favourably in North Northamptonshire.”

Other aspects of the scheme are, however, highlighted below.

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

• Noise; • Shadow flicker; • Land use considerations; - 47 -

• Landscape and Visual Impact (including the cumulative visual impact); • Ecology and Nature Conservation; • Historic Environment: • Geology, Hydrology and Hydrogeology: • Air Quality; • Access and Highway Safety; and • Air Traffic Control.

Conclusion Subject to adequate and appropriate use of planning conditions and obligations to mitigate any perceived issues outlined under the section Other material planning matters above, there are considered to be no substantive reasons to object to the grant of planning permission for the development as proposed.

RECOMMENDATION: Offer no objection to the proposal subject to Kettering Borough Council satisfying themselves that there would be no cumulative landscape and visual impacts when considering this proposal in connection with the proposed wind farm at Bozeat (planning application reference: WP/2008/0603/OEIA).

- 48 -

BOROUGH COUNCIL OF WELLINGBOROUGH AGENDA ITEM

Planning Committee 04/11/2009

Report of the Head of Built Environment

APPLICATION REF: WP/2009/0396/C

PROPOSAL: Extension to form new school reception area and children's centre.

LOCATION: Earls Barton Junior School, 5 Broad Street, Earls Barton, Wellingborough. NN6 0ND

APPLICANT: Mrs Deborah Mahon, Children and Young People's Service NCC

This application is referred to the Planning Committee for comment because it is a County Council application.

PROPOSAL AND DESCRIPTION OF SITE: As above. The site upon which the new extension is located, is owned by Northamptonshire County Council and forms part of the existing Earls Barton Junior School. The site is at present an area of sloped landscaped garden, with footpaths between the two separate School buildings, which have floor levels that are at approximately 1200mm difference.

The proposal is to create a shared building, housing a new School Reception area and the new Children’s Centre, using a shared main entrance but separate receptions and office areas. The other main objective for the school is to create a corridor link between the two school buildings, which are at present only accessible externally. Due to the difference in existing floor levels of the buildings, the proposal also includes steps and access lift in the new building.

ASSESSMENT: The extension is considered acceptable. A public meeting was held in July 2009 in order to explain the proposal.

RECOMMENDATION: That no objection be raised.

YA 4

1 5 Issues 39 Borough Council Of Wellingborough:4 Licence No.100018694. Published 20/10/2009 Fire 854 4 8 s Station

er Y

263900 4 wl 263900

4 d

5 ET r 6

1 Bo 4

3 E Ya 7

1 R 0b

7 1 0

1 ST a

2 Y

GH 4

I 0

H a

0 7

2 8 0

b Sinks (

9 3

3 3

0 8 4

3 1

t o

6 3

U t i n

0 Austins s

b 2

4 Yard

4 H 2

3 C 0

2 a R

33 U 1

8 4 H

29 C

3 12

3 2 0

Earls Barton Junior School 1

638 638 2

0 F

6 8

1 4

1 2 1

8 33 Earls Barton Infant School Church of St Anselm 637 637

Libr

4 ary

2 1

14 B

4 2 8 17

2 72.5m 31 2

3 BR

8 y 1 D 3a r ST 5 9

e 33 3

0 g 8 3 R

r 2 E 4 1

u E 1 1

T 6

S 2

1 0 h 4 4

c 1

r 2 6 1 u 44

C 5

5 80.2m B

6 4

0 3 6

6 3

8 6 8 3

2 5 4

8 4 3 3

21 24 0

263600 25 8 263600 485300 485500

BLACKW 854 1

ELL 7 CL 0

OSE Scale 1:1250 3

7 4 2

Manor 2

6 Farm 2 - 49 -

BOROUGH COUNCIL OF WELLINGBOROUGH AGENDA ITEM

Planning Committee 04/11/2009

Report of the Head of Built Environment

APPLICATION REF: WP/2009/0397/C

PROPOSAL: Variation of condition 2 of planning permission 09/00007/WAS - extension to MRF building and increase in annual waste imports.

LOCATION: White Plant, 301 Grendon Road, Earls Barton, Northampton. NN6 0RB

APPLICANT: Alibone Recycling Limited.

This application is referred to the Planning Committee for comment because it is a County Council application.

PROPOSAL AND DESCRIPTION OF SITE: As above.

ASSESSMENT: The site is shown on Location Plan GPP/A/EB/09/01 and the approved layout is shown on Site Outline Plan GPP/ARL/EB/08/02a.

The application site has been development by Alibone Recycling, in accordance with planning permission 07/00027/WAS, for the operation of a waste transfer and materials recycling facility. A copy of the original planning permission is included in Appendix 1.

A further permission was granted in April 2009 for the extension of the Materials Recycling Facility and Transfer station by the addition of four 6m wide bays, together with an increase in waste inputs from 85,000 tonnes per annum (t.p.a.) to 150,000 t.p.a.

Condition 2 of Planning Permission 09/00007/WAS states that:

“This planning permission shall only relate to the area edged in red on the submitted plan GPP/ARL/EB/09/02 hereafter referred to as the ‘site’. The development hereby permitted shall only be carried out within the site in accordance with the details set out in the submitted application forms, certificates and supporting information.”

At the time of the application for the extension to the building, it was intended to carry out the following operations inside the extended building:

1 6

A 8

m u (

h 117 t a P Borough Council Of Wellingborough: Licence No.100018694. Published 20/10/2009 117a 119 855 856 857 858 859 860 861

127 263200 263200 135

139

145

160

1 5 3

168 1 D

0 17 B 61.3m 631 631

D 1 Issues 6 5 r a ( 1 1 5 i 6 9 n 9

1 6

1 7 1

1 7 3

1 7

9 1

9 17

1 8 3

6 Allotment Gardens

1 Y

6 8 9 7 5 1 4

8 630 630

4 0 0 2 @ A

2 ( ( Sinks

4 Y

14 D AD 1 PE RO Allotment Gardens

THOR

1 3

629 629

45 A 45 A 5

. B 1 m

628 T 628

D 627 D 627

Concrete Recycling Centre ck

Tra

Cattle Grid D

626 626

u b D w

D y D 5 4 A Cattle Grid

Ponds 625 625

Appletons Place

3 3 624 624

c k C 323

Depot 3 4 4 ck Tra D 3 4 623 1 623

Fairacre

4 B7 Club .5 m

S T A T I O N

R OA

D Drain Sports Ground

622 622

Tennis

Court

D Drain D Drain ((

|(|( ||

Pond |(|( C D

D r a D i n 621 621

FB 48.8m oPs M ( D ( ( H Pump House r B a R i

iv n

er Track k @ N n

Loc ene Drai

a P g Y in Drain H Water w Y o ( T @ Weir Works n Sluice ai Dr ck Tra 262000 B47.5m Conveyors262000 n ai Dr 485400 486200

r 855 856 857 858 859 860 861 C yo

El on ve ve on yo C Sub Sta rs

H T

Y Pond Scale 1:5000 D

ng Path Towi k ac Tr

eY n

e Nene N River r e AD ( C v RO @ i ION R STAT 47.5m Works

WB C

Weir in Dra D

r a - 50 -

• A bulking up area for dry recyclables (plastics, glass, metals, paper, card); to handle 20,000 t.p.a. The dry recyclables will be received from local authority collection rounds, in small quantities and bulked up in to 20 tonnes loads for transfer to a specialised sorting facility elsewhere in the county. • Paper and card bulking up and baling, with internal storage for paper bales, and an external walled area for the card bales, to handle up to 100,000 t.p.a. • Mixed waste (timber, aggregates, concrete, soils, stones, metals, plastics, paper and card) to sort and bulk to for onward movement off site. Any materials suitable for inclusion with dry recyclables will be added to the materials being removed off- site for sorting off-site and paper and card will be removed to add to the baling operation, to handle 30,000 t.p.a.

The operator wishes to carry out the bulking of skip waste in part of the outside yard area, for the next year, until the extension to the building has been constructed. This will provide extra space inside the existing building to handle the paper and card operations, which are the main activities at this site.

The proposed location for the outside reception and transfer of waste is shown on the Site Plan GPP/A/EB/09/02 and referred to as ‘concrete area’. This area was used by the previous operator at the site for green waste composting, therefore it has a bunded concrete surface, laid to drain to an interceptor. The area is shown on the photographs in Appendix 2.

It is proposed to surround the site on three sides using 3m high alpha blocks, which will provide containment and prevent waste from spreading beyond the bunded area.

Vehicles delivering to the area will unload at the southern end of the area. The waste will then be transferred to a bulker parked on the northern part of the area. The bulker will then take the material to the operator’s site at Pilot Road, Corby for sorting.

No waste will be allowed to remain within the area overnight i.e. all waste delivered during the day will be loaded into a bulker by the end of the working day.

This application therefore seeks the variation of the condition as follows:

The following hours of operation have previously been approved for this site. Planning permission was granted for operations at the site. Monday – Friday 06:00 – 20:00 Saturdays 07:00 – 13:00 Sundays 08:00 – 13:00 Bank Holidays 08:00 – 13:00 (Except Christmas Day and Boxing Day)

- 51 -

However the outdoor activities hereby proposed will only take place between the hours of 07:30 and 17:00 Monday to Friday.

There is no material increase in visual effects, or highway impacts.

RECOMMENDATION: That no objections are raised.

- 52 -

BOROUGH COUNCIL OF WELLINGBOROUGH AGENDA ITEM

FOR INFORMATION

Planning Committee 04/11/2009

Report of the Head of Built Environment

APPLICATION REF: WP/2008/0373/OB

PROPOSAL: Outline application: Residential development.

LOCATION: Hawthorn Road (land off) Burton Latimer, Kettering.

APPLICANT: Burton Developments LLP.

NOTE: Refused by Kettering Borough Council on 15th September 2008 for the following reason/s:-

1. The site lies within the open countryside where well-established national and local planning policy principles indicate that no development should take place. The proposal is, therefore, contrary to the guidance of PPS1 and PPS7 and the requirements of CSS Policy: Distribution and Location of Development.

2. The CSS sets a maximum figure of 700 net additional dwellings for the period 2001-2021 for the town of Burton Latimer. The figure has already been exceeded. The CSS Examination in Public Inspector concluded that an upward revision of this figure was not justified and that pressure for further housing development would be more sustainably delivered in Kettering via the planned Sustainable Urban Extension. Consequently, the proposal is contrary to CSS Policy: Distribution of Housing.

3. The submitted Transport Assessment fails to provide sufficient information to enable an assessment of the impacts on the development in highway safety and capacity terms to be made and as such fails to demonstrate that the development will not have a detrimental impact on highway safety and capacity. The scheme is thereby considered to be contrary to the requirements of Policy T3 of the Northamptonshire County Structure Plan and CSS Policy: General Sustainable Development Principles.

4. Insufficient information has been submitted with the application to demonstrate that the level, tenure, type and size of affordable housing to be provided as part of the development will meet local housing need. The scheme is thereby considered to be contrary to the requirements of Policy 15 of the North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy and PPS3 ‘Housing’.

WP/2008/0373/OB - 53 -

5. Insufficient information has been submitted with the application to demonstrate that required contributions to meet the local education and health needs generated by the development will be provided as well as the provision of public open space to meet the needs of future occupiers of the development. The scheme therefore fails to meet the requirements of Policy 5 ‘Green Infrastructure’ and Policy 6 ‘Infrastructure Delivery and Developer Contributions’ of the North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy and PPG 17 ‘Sport and Recreation’.

- 54 -

4th November 2009

PLANNING COMMITTEE

The following applications dealt with under the terms of the Deputy Chief Executive’s delegated powers.

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

WP/2009/0139/F Mr B Spence 2A Leys Road, AC Wellingborough. Amendment to planning permission WP/2007/0673/F to include an additional flat in the roofspace of the existing building.

WP/2009/0223/F Wellingborough Homes Barringers Court, AC St Katharines Way, Irchester. Refurbishment and re- modelling of existing sheltered housing accommodation including extensions and new single storey refuse bin store, plant room and all associated external works - amended plans and additional information.

WP/2009/0271/F Wellingborough Homes 9f Silver Street, AC Wellingborough. Internal alterations and external fire escape staircase

WP/2009/0278/F Mr Stephen Piercy 3 Cannon Street, APPROVED Wellingborough. Change of use from employment agency (A2) to Tattoo studio (suis generis).

WP/2009/0295/F Mr Norton 43 Norlinton Close, AC Orlingbury. Erection of a detached single garage.

WP/2009/0296/F Mr Cox Tudor Lodge, 15 St Marys AC Avenue, Finedon. Single storey extension to provide 3 car garage and boot room.

- 55 -

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

WP/2009/0298/F Mr I Norton The Lodge, 2 Taggies Yard, REFUSED Orlingbury. Erection of stables.

WP/2009/0299/F Mr Clive Perrett 35 Mears Ashby Road, AC Earls Barton. Retention of a new front/side boundary feature incorporating low level wall, brick piers and railings.

WP/2009/0300/F Mr Mick Hilless Glebe Barns, Mears Ashby AC Stonemason Road, Wilby. Proposed alterations to existing barns (conversion to dwelling) - revised scheme further to planning approval WP/2006/0681/F).

WP/2009/0303/F Wellingborough Homes Parking area to the rear of APPROVED 62-67 Nightingale Lane, Wellingborough. Environmental improvements comprising the removal of raised planting bed to create 3 parking spaces, replace existing barrier rails with row of bollards and re-surface existing parking spaces.

WP/2009/0305/F Mrs Sally Webb Our Ladys Roman Catholic APPROVED Junior School, Henshaw Road, Wellingborough. Single storey secure reception extension and new single storey staff room.

WP/2009/0308/LB Miss Belinda Line The Steps, 11 Middle Street, AC Isham. Renovations and repairs to front façade of property, including windows, guttering and air ventilation grills, beyond the current cosmetic work being undertaken. (Application for Listed Building Consent)

- 56 -

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

WP/2009/0309/F Mr Simon Favell 8 Silver Street, AC Wellingborough Homes Wellingborough. Change of use from A1 to Community Financial Inclusion and Tenant Resource Centre (A2).

WP/2009/0311/F Mr Alfred Shergold 58 Weavers Road, AC Wellingborough. Single storey bedroom/shower room extension.

WP/2009/0312/F Ms J Cousins 8 The Maltings, Wollaston. AC Porch alteration and lounge extension.

WP/2009/0314/LB Mr Clive Hillman Hill Cottage, 38 London AC Road, Wollaston. To fit a new front door with glazed side panel to replace existing. (Application for Listed Building Consent).

WP/2009/0317/F Mr and Mrs Simon 62 Station Road, AC Thorneycroft Earls Barton. Proposed rear single storey extension to house.

WP/2009/0318/F Mr David Marriott The Cottage, 19 Hardwick AC Village, Hardwick. Extend/convert double garage to form granny annexe - Revised scheme following the approval of WP/2009/0185/F.

WP/2009/0322/FCOU Miss Stephanie Walsh Units 7A & 9 The Yard, 57 AC High Street, Wollaston. Change of use from retail/storage to A3 (tearooms).

WP/2009/0324/F Mr and Mrs K Little 18 White Way, Earls Barton. AC Proposed two storey extension and single storey to the rear elevation. Single storey garage and porch extension to the front elevation.

- 57 -

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

WP/2009/0325/F Mr and Mrs Alan Brett-Pitt 7 Gretton Court, AC Wellingborough. Two storey side and rear extension.

WP/2009/0327/FCOU Wellingborough Homes Adjacent 21 Teal Lane, AC Wellingborough. Environmental improvements to parking bay and raised planter to create additional parking.

WP/2009/0328/FCOU Mr James Aldwinkle 2 High Street, Irchester. APPROVED Reachout Community Church Change of use for no. 2 High Street Irchester from A1 use to D1 use for extra meeting rooms for the Reachout Community Church sited at no. 4 High Street Irchester.

WP/2009/0331/F JILHAJ and Brother Limited 9 Wollaston Road, Irchester. AC Erection of a single storey extension to the take-away kitchen.

WP/2009/0332/F Mr Jason Vaughan 11 Hayden Avenue, Finedon. AC Single storey rear extension.

WP/2009/0335/F Mr James Morgan 4 Howard Road, Wollaston. AC Installation of bathroom window on first floor in side gable end.

WP/2009/0337/F Mr J Cousens 19 Lancaster Close, AC Wollaston. First floor en suite for existing bedroom involving raising the roof pitch.

WP/2009/0340/F Sainsbury's Supermarkets Former Grovenor Office APPROVED Limited Building, Victoria Mills, London Road, Little Irchester. The installation of five condenser units, one eco vent stacked unit and external alterations.

- 58 -

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

WP/2009/0343/AV Mr Chris Berry Fence, Turnells Mill Lane, REFUSED www.wellingboroughlakes.com A509/A45 Junction South, Wellingborough. Two banner signs.

WP/2009/0346/PLUD Mr and Mrs Michael Newman 55 Queen Street, Bozeat. AGREED Construction of new extension to rear of property.

WP/2009/0347/FCOU Mr Peter Green Shop, 56 Newcomen Road, APPROVED PRG Recruit Limited Wellingborough. Change of use from retail (A1) to office use (A2).

WP/2009/0348/O Mrs Barbara White Land at rear of 3 Aggate Way AC fronting Park Lane, Park Lane, Earls Barton. Erection of a self-contained bungalow to be constructed in rear garden of 3 Aggate Way having vehicular access from Park Lane. (Outline application with all matters reserved for future consideration) - re- submission following withdrawn application WP/2009/0261/O.

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, Sustainable Communities, Croyland Abbey, Tithe Barn Road, Wellingborough.

- 59 -

PLANNING COMMITTEE - BUILDING REGULATION DECISIONS ISSUED APPLICATIONS DEALT WITH

APPLICATION DECISIONS BOROUGH OF WELLINGBOROUGH Date: 19/10/2009

Application No. Name & Address Description FP/2005/0958/ C Mr Simon Marriott Conversion of factory into 14 Brook Hill Farm residential flats. APPROVED C Main Road Wilby Wellingborough Northamptonshire

FP/2009/0694/ Mr J Hurst Kitchen alterations and garage 5 Hardwater Road extension. APPROVED C Great Doddington Wellingborough Northamptonshire

FP/2009/0819/ Mr and Mrs K & R Brawn Erection of single storey, timber, 7 Hardwater Road double glazed APPROVED Great Doddington conservatory/extension. Wellingborough Northamptonshire

PS/2009/0852/ Merton Council Loft and garage conversion. Merton Civic Centre APPROVED London Road Morden

FP/2009/0901/ Mr Lee Smith Erection of a new three storey 4/5 90 Windsor Road bed dwelling. APPROVED C Wellingborough Northamptonshire - 60 -

PLANNING COMMITTEE - BUILDING REGULATION DECISIONS ISSUED APPLICATIONS DEALT WITH

APPLICATION DECISIONS BOROUGH OF WELLINGBOROUGH Date: 19/10/2009

Application No. Name & Address Description PS/2009/0903/ Northampton Borough Conversion of office to restaurant. Council APPROVED C The Guildhall St. Giles Square Northampton

FP/2009/0932/ Mrs K Beard Garage conversion to 41 Duke Street lounge/shower room. APPROVED C Wellingborough Northamptonshire

PS/2009/0976/ Leicester City Council Semi-detached dwelling. Building Control APPROVED New Walk Centre Welford Place Leicester

FP/2009/0980/ Mr and Mrs Asbury Side extension to provide lobby and 62 Queensway ground floor shower room. APPROVED C Wellingborough Northamptonshire

FP/2009/1008/ Andrew Rich and First floor extension to garage and Emily Timmins dining room, kitchen and utility APPROVED C 1 Mills Close extension, addition of porch. Earls Barton Northampton Northamptonshire - 61 -

PLANNING COMMITTEE - BUILDING REGULATION DECISIONS ISSUED APPLICATIONS DEALT WITH

APPLICATION DECISIONS BOROUGH OF WELLINGBOROUGH Date: 19/10/2009

Application No. Name & Address Description FP/2009/1020/ Stephen Jackson Extension to rear of garage. 23 Windermere Drive APPROVED C Wellingborough Northamptonshire

BN/2009/1022/ Mrs Hawkins New flat roof with insulation. 6 Duke Street ACCEPTED Wellingborough Northamptonshire

DI/2009/1036/ Mr R Williams Undertake disabled adaptation (wet 13 Queen Street room). ACCEPTED Wellingborough Northamptonshire

DI/2009/1037/ Mrs A Tappin Undertake disabled adaptation (wet 8 Canonbury room). ACCEPTED Wellingborough Northamptonshire

FP/2009/1043/ Mr M Chamberlain First floor extension forming games Sunnyside room; internal alterations. APPROVED C 11 Vicarage Lane Mears Ashby Northampton Northamptonshire - 62 -

PLANNING COMMITTEE - BUILDING REGULATION DECISIONS ISSUED APPLICATIONS DEALT WITH

APPLICATION DECISIONS BOROUGH OF WELLINGBOROUGH Date: 19/10/2009

Application No. Name & Address Description BN/2009/1044/ Mr R Miller Removal of chimney breast in 6 Church View bedroom. ACCEPTED Ecton Northampton Northamptonshire

DI/2009/1047/ Mr F Cockings Ground floor wet room. 54 Milner Road ACCEPTED Finedon Wellingborough Northamptonshire

BN/2009/1075/ Stephen Brunt Conversion of integral garage to 32 Coulon Close dwelling. ACCEPTED Irchester Wellingborough Northamptonshire

FP/2009/1077/ Mr S Summerfield Conversion of garage to living 13 Fir Tree Grove room. APPROVED C Bozeat Wellingborough Northamptonshire

BN/2009/1078/ Mrs C J Noonan To correctly support chimney breast 59 Princess Way which has been removed and is not ACCEPTED Wellingborough supported correctly at present. Northamptonshire - 63 -

PLANNING COMMITTEE - BUILDING REGULATION DECISIONS ISSUED APPLICATIONS DEALT WITH

APPLICATION DECISIONS BOROUGH OF WELLINGBOROUGH Date: 19/10/2009

Application No. Name & Address Description DI/2009/1100/ Mr Ralph Gaberiel First floor L/A shower and through 3 Somerford Road floor lift. ACCEPTED Wellingborough Northamptonshire

BN/2009/1103/ Mr A Mycroft Convert existing conservatory into 1 Aggate Way living accommodation. ACCEPTED Earls Barton Northampton Northamptonshire

BN/2009/1104/ Mr Malcolm Kildin Garage conversion. 2 Tees Close ACCEPTED Wellingborough Northamptonshire

DI/2009/1114/ Mr M R Harrison Garage alterations for disabled 49 Churchill Road person. ACCEPTED Earls Barton Northampton Northamptonshire

BN/2009/1127/ Shawn Martin Replacement flat roof. The Old Stone Factory ACCEPTED 4 Shirley Road Rushden Northamptonshire - 64 -

PLANNING COMMITTEE - BUILDING REGULATION DECISIONS ISSUED APPLICATIONS DEALT WITH

APPLICATION DECISIONS BOROUGH OF WELLINGBOROUGH Date: 19/10/2009

Application No. Name & Address Description FP/2009/1130/ Ms J Cousens Porch alterations and lounge 8 The Maltings extension. APPROVED C Wollaston Wellingborough Northamptonshire

BN/2009/1133/ Alan Reid Conversion of part integral garage 3 Cleeve Way into a living/study space. ACCEPTED Wellingborough Northamptonshire

FP/2009/1134/ M Howell Relocation of en-suite within 2 Church Farm bedrooms. Addition of downstairs APPROVED C Church Way cloakroom. Northampton

DI/2009/1136/ Lovell Partnership Limited Disabled adaptations to existing Unit 10, Brunel Close bathroom to create shower room. ACCEPTED Wellingborough Northamptonshire

FP/2009/1139/ Mr N Patel Rear extension to kitchen to 17 Alexandra Road provide toilet and utility area. APPROVED C Wellingborough Northamptonshire - 65 -

PLANNING COMMITTEE - BUILDING REGULATION DECISIONS ISSUED APPLICATIONS DEALT WITH

APPLICATION DECISIONS BOROUGH OF WELLINGBOROUGH Date: 19/10/2009

Application No. Name & Address Description BN/2009/1149/ Mr and Mrs Ford Re-roofing of main two storey 32 Wollaston Road house - slate for slate. ACCEPTED Irchester Wellingborough Northamptonshire

FP/2009/1150/ Mr P Dodson Erection of new two storey two bed 53 Station Road dwelling. APPROVED C Earls Barton Northampton Northamptonshire

DI/2009/1151/ G.A.M.E. Construction Disabled adaptation for level P.O. Box 36 access shower. ACCEPTED Kettering Northamptonshire

DI/2009/1152/ G.A.M.E. Construction Disabled bathroom adaptation P.O. Box 36 ACCEPTED Kettering Northamptonshire

DI/2009/1153/ G.A.M.E. Construction Disabled adaptation for level P.O. Box 36 access shower. ACCEPTED Kettering Northamptonshire