Regulatory Committee Wednesday 12Th October 2005 at 7.00Pm Council Chamber, Swanspool House

. Swanspool House Wellingborough Borough Council of NN8 1BP

Wellingborough 4th October 2005

Regulatory Committee Wednesday 12th October 2005 at 7.00pm Council Chamber, Swanspool House

AGENDA

1. Apologies for absence.

2. Declarations of Interest (if any).

Ι 3. Confirmation of the minutes of the meeting held on 14/9/2005.

Ι 4. Applications for planning permission, building regulation approval etc.

Ι 5. Development Control Performance Report 6. Any other business that the Chairman decides is urgent.

Ι Enclosed

Please note: Site Viewing Group for Tuesday 11th October 2005 will be Councillors Morrall, Old, Patel and Waters.

Pamela Tunn Acting Head of the Paid Service

Membership: Councillor Waters (Chairman), Councillor Morrall (Vice- Chairman), Councillors Beirne, Bell, Dholakia, Lawman, Mann, Old, Palmer, Patel, Ryan, Smith and Ward.

For further copies of agenda and reports contact Performance and Democratic Services 01933 231511.

Borough Council of Wellingborough Regulatory Committee Wednesday 12th October 2005 at 7.00 pm Council Chamber, Swanspool House

INDEX

Page No. SITE VIEWING GROUP

WP/2005/0571/F - Garden land at 43 Cedar Way, Wellingborough. 1 WP/2005/0598/F - 71 Irthlingborough Road, Finedon. 5

DISTRICT

WP/2004/0730/F Midland Road Bridge, Midland Road, Wellingborough. 7 WP/2005/0474/F - Land adjacent to 108 London Road, Bozeat. 44 WP/2005/0487/F - 30 Mulso Road, Finedon. 49 WP/2005/0528/F - The Tithe Barn, High Street, Irchester. 53 WP/2005/0595/O - All Saints House, 26 Middle Street, Isham. 61 WP/2005/0627/C - Ruskin Infants School, Ruskin Avenue, Wellingborough. 65

FOR INFORMATION

WP/2002/0266/C - Earls Barton Quarry, Grendon Road, Earls Barton. 67 WP/2005/0001/C - Land south of A45 adjacent to Irchester Turn, Higham Road, Irchester. 68 WP/2005/0432/C - Appleby Lodge Farm, Sywell Road, Wellingborough. 71 WP/2005/0443/C Earls Barton Quarry, Grendon Road, Earls Barton. 74

BOROUGH COUNCIL OF WELLINGBOROUGH AGENDA ITEM

SITE VIEWING (Date of visit 11th October 2005 at 10.15 a.m.)

Regulatory Committee 12/10/2005

Report of the Director of Environment and Economy

APPLICATION REF: WP/2005/0571/F

PROPOSAL: Construction of new dwelling with integral garage, and detached single garage. Further to outline consent ref- WP/2004/0737/O.

LOCATION: Garden land at 43 Cedar Way, Wellingborough.

APPLICANT: Mr J Jellis.

PROPOSAL AND DESCRIPTION OF SITE: (As above). The proposal is to demolish the existing garage and erect a bungalow in the present garden of 43 Cedar Way. The application site is presently occupied by a semi- detached bungalow and detached garage and is situated at the head of the Cedar Drive cul-de-sac. The latter is fronted by mostly semi-detached bungalows (red/brick, or partly rendered, with red or grey concrete tiled roofs) dating from the 1960’s.

An original application for a dwelling on this site (WP/2004/0539/O) was withdrawn on 27 August 2004. This was also for the erection of a new bungalow and garage within the existing site, although in this instance siting and access was not reserved. This earlier application was accompanied by ‘indicative design’ drawings of the new bungalow.

A replacement outline application (WP/2004/0737/O) was submitted and reported to the meeting of the Regulatory Services Committee on 8th December 2004. Approval was granted by the Regulatory Services Committee subject to conditions.

The current full application is referred to the Regulatory Committee for determination as five written objections have been received from neighbours.

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY: WU/58/79 Housing estate. WU/62/60 14 pairs s/d bungalows, 1 detached house and 4 pair’s s/d houses. WU/73/B385 Conservatory. WU/64/B66 Garage. WU/63/B254 Additional room. WP/2004/0539/O New bungalow and garages within existing site. WP/2004/0737/O New bungalow and garages within existing site.

NATIONAL AND LOCAL PLANNING POLICY: Borough of Wellingborough Local Plan: G1, H5 and H12. County Structure Plan: GS2, GS3, GS5 and H2. Planning Policy Guidance notes: PPS 1 and PPG 3.

G 2 E

2 IM

L 1

489000 9 489200 4 7

891

269200 7 7 269200

3 6 8

09 3

D 6 D D

D 5 0

2 0 1

D 2 6

E U N E V A D E 1 E R T

2 LU 4 D P C D H E R R Y A

V 2 E 3 N D 1 U E 691 691 D 15

3 1 1 4 a 3 3 3

6 1

3 Oakway Junior

School

6 3 E l S u

b Breezehill

8 S Breezehill 3 ta Cottage Y Farm C A E W D R A A R D

W E

2 5 C

4 A 3

Y 4 9 4

690 4 690

3 6 4 W 9

7 8 C E D 5 4 A R WA

Y 8

5 1 11

5 0

5 1 2

5 2 3

C E D A R

268900 4 W 268900 0 AY 489000 891 489200

Scale 1:1250

9 0 2 7 2 SUMMARY OF REPLIES TO CONSULTATIONS/REPRESENTATIONS RECEIVED: 1. NCC Highways - the highway standards and planning conditions set out in the NCC document 'Minor Planning Applications that have an effect on the Highway' be applied. In addition, at the pre-application stage, the Local Highway Authority indicated to the applicants that the boundary treatment to the front of the site must be no more than 600mm high, the clear width of the shared drive to be increased to 4.5m, the vehicular crossing must be to the specification of the Local Highway Authority and the drive is to be hard surfaced for the first 5m from the highway. The Local highway Authority now confirm that the submitted scheme complies with these requirements

2. Third Parties – five letters have been received from neighbours objecting on the grounds of the difficulties service vehicles have in turning at the head of the narrow cul-de-sac, hazards likely from construction vehicles if permission is granted, the proposal, which is now two-storey is too close to the side and rear boundary, loss of light and privacy, loss of property values, overbearing impact of the proposal, lack of on street parking for visitors, noise and disturbance. A suggestion is also made that rear access is also being gained via 43 Cedar Drive to the rear garden of a property in Cherry Avenue.

ASSESSMENT: (i) Compliance with Development Plan Policy (ii) Suitability of the site for development (iii) Responding to the points made in the objections

(i) Given that the site represents an infill plot within the confines of Wellingborough there is no fundamental objection to development taking place and therefore the principle of development on this site is acceptable. Government and strategic planning policy presently seeks to maximise development opportunities within existing settlements so as to minimise the take up of Greenfield sites. Also with an increased demand to meet the needs of new household formation there is a particular need to develop smaller dwelling units. The granting of outline planning permission on 8th December 2004 has established the principle of the development of this site. It is therefore only the precise form and nature of the proposal that now falls to be determined and its relationship with neighbouring properties and the amenities of the occupiers of such properties.

(ii) The site is of sufficient size to allow the development of a bungalow that will be in keeping with existing dwellings on the surrounding residential estate and the immediate neighbouring properties. Cedar Drive is characterised by the setting of properties in a systematic and consistent fashion within their plots with regular spacing.

(iii) The principle of carrying out residential development on this site has been accepted with the grant of outline planning permission. The Local Highway Authority does not raise any objections in respect of the generation, by the proposal, of extra traffic. The proposal is a bungalow with rooms in the roof space. These are lit by roof-lights and a single window to the gable end facing the new garage block between the application site and no. 43 Cedar Drive. No overlooking will arise from these windows. The application proposal was subject to extensive pre-application discussion and negotiation and a re-siting and some changes to the design have been achieved. The latter is so as to minimise the impact upon the amenities of neighbouring occupiers and to ensure that the character and appearance of the street scene of Cedar Drive is not unduly prejudiced. The question of the new 3 access being created by new owners is a separate issue that is being investigated independently from consideration of the current application. This factor does not have a bearing on the determination of the current application.

There are no valid reasons or material planning considerations why planning permission should not 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. 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. The site shall be landscaped and planted with trees and shrubs in accordance with a comprehensive scheme which shall be submitted to and approved by the local planning authority before the development is commenced. The scheme shall be implemented concurrently with the development and shall be completed not later than the first planting season following the substantial completion of the development. Any trees and shrubs removed, dying, being severely damaged or becoming seriously diseased within five years of planting shall be replaced by trees and shrubs of similar size and species to those originally required to be planted or other species as may be agreed. 4. A scheme for screen fencing/walling shall be agreed with the local planning authority before the start of construction. The agreed scheme shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the local planning authority before the houses are occupied. 5. Prior to the commencement of development a written and design specification for the formation of a new/revised access to the site in accordance with the requirements of the Northamptonshire County Highway Authority, shall be submitted for approval by the local planning authority and on completion should thereafter be retained. All works to the new accesses shall be laid to hard paving for the first 5 metres. 6. A triangular visibility splay of 2.4 m x 2.4 m shall be provided on each side of the vehicle access point to the site. The splay shall be positioned within the site at right angles to the highway (measured at the highway/site boundary). The visibility splay so described shall be maintained free of any obstruction to visibility to a height of 600mm above the existing ground level. 7. Prior to the commencement of development a survey of site levels and finished floor levels shall be carried out and the results plotted on a drawing to be submitted for approval to the local planning authority. 8. Before development commences a risk assessment shall be carried out with regard to the presence of naturally occurring arsenic on the site. The investigation shall include a scheme for the remediation of the site and shall be carried out prior to the occupation of the dwellings to the satisfaction of the local planning authority.

Reasons: 1. Required to be imposed pursuant to S51 of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004. 2. In the interests of amenity. 4 3. In the interests of visual amenity. 4. In the interests of amenity and privacy. 5. In the interests of the safety and convenience of users of the adjoining highway/s. 6. In the interests of the safety and convenience of users of the adjoining highway/s. 7. In the interests of amenity. 8. To avoid any detrimental effects of contamination.

BOROUGH COUNCIL OF WELLINGBOROUGH AGENDA ITEM

SITE VIEWING (Date of visit 11th October 2005 at 11.00 a.m.)

Regulatory Committee 12/10/2005

Report of the Director of Environment and Economy

APPLICATION REF: WP/2005/0598/F

PROPOSAL: Vehicular access.

LOCATION: 71 Irthlingborough Road, Finedon, Wellingborough.

APPLICANT: Mr M Callus.

PROPOSAL AND DESCRIPTION OF SITE: The proposal is for a vehicular access to a property fronting onto the A6.

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY: None relevant to the determination of this application.

NATIONAL AND LOCAL PLANNING POLICY: Polices G1.3 and T9.1 of the adopted Borough of Wellingborough Local Plan.

SUMMARY OF REPLIES TO CONSULTATIONS/REPRESENTATIONS RECEIVED: 1. Finedon Parish Council – the Councillors object to this application as the owner has already removed the grass verge and placed gravel on it. They object to the loss of the grass verge.

2. County Highway Authority – although access is already gained to the limited forecourt of the property I am unable to support the formalisation of the activity on highway safety grounds. It is noted that because of insufficient depth vehicles using the parking area are required to manoeuvre and park longitudinally and, more significantly, habitually overhang and encroach onto the highway verge resulting in safety implications for both pedestrians and passing vehicles.

3. Third parties – no views received at the time of writing this report.

ASSESSMENT: The proposal is for an access to the A6 at Finedon. This road sees considerable volumes of traffic each day. The owner of the property already parks his vehicle in the forecourt in front of his property and wishes to formalise the situation be creating a driveway and dropped kerb. This forecourt measures 9.5 metres in width but is only 2.9 metres deep. This is insufficient depth to enable the safe parking and manoeuvring of a vehicle without encroaching onto the highway verge. This situation results in safety implications for both pedestrians and passing vehicles. A depth of at least 4.8 metres would be required to meet the minimum size required for a parking space in the adopted Countywide item of Supplementary Planning Guidance on the subject of parking.

y C o 7 u

3 rt 2 2

1 2 2 492300 492500

272100 272100

1 2 5 2 1 1

2 2

c 7 2 2 7 3 d 3 1 7 2 2

9 to 1

3 3

U 0 e N g IO 3 N 7 5 a r S a T 5 R G E T 's 3 C r 5 E e a T T B A d S il d M

6 r IA 3

u L 1

a 4

B 8 L 2 Y I 1 0 W 5 720 720

U 2

0 1

4 N

A 2 6

T 1 I 1

E 2 O

6 E N 1 PH 2 4 R S 3

T T S 4 R M E LB A E

I T L 5 IL E l W 3

9 S

7 1 u T 2 b 1 E S E t R a

2 5 S

D 1 R 2 4 O 9 F X

1 4

5 5

7 2

D 8 A O 6 R 5 S IB E L N E

R Y

O 4 2

6 1 H 6 T 90.9m 7 W A

719 719 6

7 0 T 7 1 O W E R 7

2 L 8 O S E

3 8

5 7

2 4

2 2

3 0 0 b 9

7 2

0 a

9 9

2 The Tower

271800 271800

492300 924 492500 Scale 1:1250 9 9

101 W a F 6 The highway authority objects to the application on safety grounds. In view of this, the application should be refused.

RECOMMENDATION: Refuse.

1. The proposal is considered to be contrary to Polices G1.3 and T9.1 of the adopted Borough of Wellingborough Local Plan in that there is insufficient space within the forecourt of the property subject to this application to satisfactorily and safely park and manoeuvre a vehicle without encroaching onto the highway verge.

POLICY G1

PROPOSALS FOR DEVELOPMENT WILL NORMALLY BE GRANTED PLANNING PERMISSION WHERE THE DEVELOPMENT:

3. HAS A SATISFACTORY MEANS OF ACCESS, PROVIDES ADEQUATE PARKING, SERVICING AND MANOEUVRING FACILITIES AND CAN BE ADEQUATELY SERVED BY PUBLIC TRANSPORT.

POLICY T9

IN RELATION TO PROPOSALS INVOLVING THE LAYOUT OF NEW ROADS, A CHANGE IN THE CHARACTER OR VOLUME OF TRAFFIC, OR THE FORMATION OR ALTERATION OF A VEHICULAR ACCESS, PLANNING PERMISSION WILL BE GRANTED WHERE:

1. HIGHWAY STANDARDS ARE SATISFACTORILY MET. 7 BOROUGH COUNCIL OF WELLINGBOROUGH AGENDA ITEM

Regulatory Committee 12/10/2005

Report of the Director of Environment and Economy

APPLICATION REF: WP/2004/0730/F

PROPOSAL: Construction of a new single carriageway road from the eastern end of Midland Road (B572) across the railway and River Ise. The road will eventually serve as a primary access route to the proposed mixed use development east of Wellingborough.

LOCATION: Midland Road Bridge, Midland Road, Wellingborough.

APPLICANT: Bovis Homes Limited.

NOTE: This application was taken to the Regulatory Committee of 22nd June 2005 and it was resolved that the recommendation of approval of the grant of planning permission subject to conditions would be delegated to the Director of Environment and Economy upon the prior signing of a Section 106 agreement. This legal agreement related to the landowners covenanting with the LPA to ensure that no more than the first 300 housing occupations on land between Finedon Road and the Railway, Nielson’s Sidings and Land North of Finedon Road, Wellingborough, will be allowed until such a time that the improvements to the Midland Road/Senwick Road/Eastfield Road junction and approaches have been implemented in accordance with a scheme to be submitted to and agreed with the Highway Authority.

In light of further discussions, the junction of Midland Road/Senwick Road and Eastfield Road has now been signed off to the satisfaction of the Highway Authority. Therefore the requirement for the S106 legal agreement is now redundant and it is now proposed that this application be presented to the Committee for a recommendation to grant planning permission subject to conditions.

RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that full planning permission be granted subject to the original conditions plus:-

27. All works related to this consent shall be implemented in accordance with the approved plans and completed to the satisfaction of the local planning authority.

Reason: 27. To ensure a satisfactory standard of development.

N I

E W W

BM 70.71m

W Y

N Issues Ryebury Farm DP Y WP/2004/0730/F

Pond Y Water

D Sidegate Landfill

P Y

Track W

T r a c k

R ive r Ise Y Y Slope WB DP 67.9m 490000

This map is based uponP Ordnance Survey material with the permission of Ordnance Survey on behalf of the ControllerSidegate Works of Her Majesty's Stationery Office © Crown Copyrig

Unauthorised reproduction infringes Crown Copyright and may lead to prosecution or civil proceedings. 71.2m Y E S I DE GA TE LA Borough Council Of Wellingborough: Licence No.100018694. Published 04/10/2005. EE NE 910 E Nc_sc

Greenacres 3000

0 1 5 A

WELLINGBOROUGH WELLINGBOROUGH Nc_sc 6100 270000 65.7m 0 1 Greenacres 5 A

Y 57.7m

BM 56.70m 69.7m

D A O rack R T H G U O

R O W B G IN L L E W

0 1 5

A Y 56.2m Y Y

Finedon Road

Industrial Estate

Y Neilson's Sidings P P Y D Y Y

D V

Finedon Road

Industrial Estate V Y

W D P P W Y Y Water

D Pond WELLINGBOROUGH P Finedonhill Farm Track

P Tank

DP Water Works Pond

DD Y Industrial Estate Y DP Y P

P D 3151

WELLINGBOROUGH WELLINGBOROUGH D Y P Y

E T D N L P WELLINGBOROUGH

r a i E Y n P

r a

i E n

Allotment Gardens P Allotment Gardens W PP Y P P N

Allotment Gardens W P

P Slope

1500 3600 W D 690 WELLINGBOROUGH PPPP D k ac Slope Tr

South Hill Farm Allotment Gardens

DP Tank

W'S

H Track

Water

V m) (u th

D Water Pa V P V Slurry P V Pit VVW

Slope Industrial Estate WELLINGBOROUGH

65.6m Waverly D 4570 DD P Cottages

Rowan Gate (um) Path Primary SchoolD Y D Y Mill Road D Industrial Estate

D D Y D D W P DD DD Victoria Infants D D School D DD

DD D 65.6m

D V D

V D D OA

D R

D H G

OU OR D GB

LIN D V TH DV V IR DD V WELLINGBOROUGH D

P P

V 67.3m V W D P V VV D

V r V a c

D k

D W

D W V

V WELLINGBOROUGH

V Kennels

V V 65.3m

W V Kennels W

V V Grange

V Farm

VV D V V Y WELLINGBOROUGH V Y

s s

Irthlingboroughu Grange e

ry cto Fa

Y W

Wellingborough Midland Station ck ra T

65.1m W W Y Y

St Mary's Church

7 1 W

WELLINGBOROUGH 7

680 5

W W B

64.1m

Victoria Centre

Sorting Office Y W Carter Close

W Y e

s I

v i

R 61.5m

Y PD

O Y O

U E Y O

W rook P R wanspool B Leyland S O

D B

D Trading N Y I D Y

H Estate T

I D D Y

D DA 58.1m S w

a n sp D o o ok l spool Bro B Swan ro D o Y Water DDDDDDDDDDDD W k DDDDDDDDDDCastleD FieldsDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD

D WELLINGBOROUGH D DD DDD DD DD BM 55.07m

D D DDD W

D DD DDD Y 8 O R I G I N A L R E P O R T

BOROUGH COUNCIL OF WELLINGBOROUGH AGENDA ITEM

Regulatory Committee 22 June 2005

Report of Director of Environment and Economy

APPLICATION REF: WP/2004/0730/F

PROPOSAL: CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW SINGLE CARRIAGEWAY ROAD FROM THE EASTERN END OF MIDLAND ROAD (B572) ACROSS THE RAILWAY AND RIVER ISE. THE ROAD WILL EVENTUALLY SERVE AS A PRIMARY ACCESS ROUTE TO THE PROPOSED MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT EAST OF WELLINGBOROUGH.

LOCATION: MIDLAND ROAD BRIDGE, MIDLAND ROAD, WELLINGBOROUGH

APPLICANT: BOVIS HOMES LIMITED

1. Description of Site and Surrounding Area

The application site is located on the eastern edge of Wellingborough in Northamptonshire, encompasses an area of approximately 3.5 ha (8.6 acres) and comprises a mixture of brownfield and greenfield land. The application site falls within the Strategic Development Area (SDA) allocated in the Northamptonshire Structure Plan and the Borough of Wellingborough Local Plan, with the majority of the site also within the lowland floodplain of the Ise Valley. Wellingborough Town Centre lies to the west of the application site.

The site is principally bounded by arable and pastoral land, with some industrial and commercial development to the north and south of the site. Wellingborough Railway Station lies on the western part of the site, with other residential, commercial and industrial development also in close proximity – including Higgins Yard (a former builders yard on Midland Road) and part of Midland Road (including the Elsden Road and Senwick Road junctions) and part of the River Ise. Other properties adjacent to the application site include South Hill Farm, Irthlingborough Garage, approximately 500 metres to the east of the site, and an Anglian Water Pumping Station to the south east corner of the site.

The development crosses the River Ise and its floodplain just to the north of the existing mainline railway station and lies to the north of the confluence of the Rivers Ise and Nene.

The application site is surrounded by a number of villages, including Finedon to the north, Irthlingborough to the north east, Rushden to the east, Irchester to the south, and Great Harrowden, Little Harrowden to the north west and Wellingborough to the west.

There are no other significant on-site land uses within the application area.

2. Planning History

WP/2004/0600/O Mixed use development including 87 Ha of residential development: B1, B2 and B8 development, new public transport links (buses), 9 new and enhanced walking and cycling routes and facilities, country park, neighbourhood centre, 2 secondary local centres, construction of access roads, bridges and highway structures, footways, footpaths, bridleways and associated works and facilities.

WP/2004/0730/F Amended planning proposals submitted by the applicant on 18 May 2005 addressing comments from various statutory and non- statutory bodies as well as third party representations. Revisions include amendments to the detailed highway and river works design.

3. Description of the Scheme

This full planning application, registered by the Council in October 2004 (and amended in May 2005), forms part of wider strategic proposals for Wellingborough East and comprises an extension to the eastern end of Midland Road by running past Wellingborough Railway Station, over the railway line and across the River Ise.

The application seeks permission for the following development:

" Construction of a new single carriageway road from the eastern end of Midland Road (B572) across the railway and River Ise. The road will eventually serve as a primary access route to the proposed mixed use development east of Wellingborough."

In detail, the application consists of:

• An extension to Midland Road – approximately 1 km in length – to connect Wellingborough East (including Station Island) to the town and vice versa. The new road will run past Wellingborough Railway Station, over the railway line and across the River Ise • The construction of two new bridges (to enable the road to cross the railway line and River Ise) – designed so as to reflect the deign theme proposed for the station forecourt area • Retaining wall along the western boundary to the Midland Road extension footpath. This varies between 1-3.5m in height • Acoustic screen from the top of the retaining wall or from the existing level further north • Creation of a new embankment crossing the floodplain – incorporating culverts, positioned to accommodate an existing small watercourse to ensure water flow in times of flood, with retaining wall on its western side • Provision of a new junction (on the new section of Midland Road) and the signalisation, with pedestrian crossing facilities, of the Midland Road/Senwick Road junction to accommodate the forecast traffic levels • Creation of a roundabout to the east of the rail bridge enabling crossing into the Station Island development • Provision of a 3 metre wide combined cycle/footway on the south side of the new road and 1.8 metre wide footway on the north side • Connection of existing footpath from Mill Road to the north side of the road and west of the Railway • Creation of a concourse area in front of the Station • Provision of a taxi rank and bus lay-bys for pedestrians using the Station

10 Proposed mitigation measures, to alleviate the potential adverse impact of the development proposals, include:

• River works to provide flood compensation – including the realignment of the River Ise, the provision of a two stage channel, additional flood storage and the use of SUDS • Noise screen in order to protect the ‘Riverside’ property on Mill Road • Re-use of Higgins Yard as a car park to replace existing railway parking provision that will be lost following the construction of the bridge across the railway lines – for which planning permission has now been granted • Habitat creation and enhancement measures – including wet woodland, reedbeds, neutral grassland and new native structure planting across the site • Measures to ensure the preservation/recording of cultural and archaeological assets • The retention of existing landscape features, where possible, and the introduction of new planting and screening to break up the development form • Signalised traffic junctions and better signalised pedestrian crossing facilities to mitigate potential amenity and severance problems caused by the extra traffic • Restricted hours of operation (using quieter machinery and temporary screening) for the construction works and other noise and dust control measures and • Extensive site management.

The proposed mitigation measures identified above are considered in the sections below.

In support of the (amended) application, the following documents have also been submitted:

• Planning application forms and notices • Plans and drawings showing the site’s location, proposed layout and river improvement works • Environmental Statement and supplementary statement of further information • Flood Risk Assessment • Alternative route assessment • Transport Assessment and Executive Summary • Midland Road Extension – design summary for Access Route 4 • Travel Plan • Cycling strategy • Revised bus strategy • Walking strategy • Access strategy and traffic forecasts • Midland Road micro-simulation model • Midland Road Extension – Stage 1 road safety audit and response and exception report • Other Highway drawings

The Midland Road proposals (known as ‘Route 4’) provide for a central ‘Midland Road’ access which will act as the principal ‘community link’ to the development from the town and vice versa. The scheme will provide access to area of land located between the Railway and River Ise floodplain – known as Station Island – and eventually to the wider development proposals at WEAST.

11 Route 4 involves the construction of a new single carriageway road from the eastern end of Midland Road (B572), past the Station, over the railway and into Wellingborough East. Access would be provided to the station car parks, bus stops would be provided, and a taxi rank created.

In front of the Station there will be a concourse area which would be constructed to indicate an area of joint pedestrian and vehicle movement. Immediately to the north of the concourse the road will rise up on a new embankment before turning east, and crossing the site of the existing northern Station car park, before crossing the railway over a new bridge. This would be located south of the existing Mill Road Bridge and north of the station platforms. The road would then connect to a roundabout junction which will provide access to the ‘island’ of land bounded by the railway and River Ise floodplain (Station Island).

The route continues eastwards towards the centre of the site crossing the floodplain on a bridge over the River Ise and an embankment incorporating culverts to ensure water flow in times of flood. The final section of the route continues on embankment until the carriageway reaches existing ground level where it would continue on to the proposed Neighbourhood Centre in the heart of the development at WEAST. Its alignment here passes through the pumping station’s cordon sanitaire.

The route comprises a 7.3m carriageway with a 1.8m footway on the northern side and a 3.0m cycle/footway along the southern side. The route has been designed with a design speed of 30mph. As part of the works for Route 4 the junction between Senwick, Elsden and Midland Roads would be signalised. A new signalised junction would also be constructed at the inter-section of Midland Road, the southern station car park and the Royal Mail sorting office.

An extension to the current network of pedestrian and cycling facilities is also proposed in association with improvements to the existing section of Midland Road. The application proposes the integration of the proposals with existing public rights of way and junction improvements to accommodate pedestrian and cyclist crossing movements.

A Transport Assessment (TA) describes and assesses the development proposals. The application is also accompanied by Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) which identifies and assesses the potential effects of the proposed access road on the environment, and a Flood Risk Assessment (FRA) which reviews the impact of the proposed development in relation to flooding issues and surface water drainage within the catchment of the Rivers Ise and Nene. In May 2005 a revised application package including a TA, FRA and a Supplementary Statement of Further Information to the Environmental Statement was submitted to the Borough Council.

4. Background to the Application

4.1 Scheme Evolution

Due to the strategic significance of the area to the Borough, the Council set up a dedicated WEAST project team. During 2001, the team established a process of working with local stakeholders, and community groups to debate and agree upon the core guiding principles for developing the site and a series of public consultation initiatives were undertaken. Between September 2001 and April 2002, the Council also commissioned five technical studies to inform the preparation of the Wellingborough East Development Framework: 12

• Wellingborough East Development Initial Flood Risk Assessment (prepared by Halcrow) • Transportation Study (prepared by Jacobs Consultancy) • Energy/Waste Feasibility Study (prepared by UCN/De Montfort) • Town Park Study (prepared by Hankinson Duckett) • Skills Study – Labour Market Information (Matters of Fact, 2002)

In November 2001 an Enquiry by Design (EbD) event was held which resulted in a series of sketch plans for WEAST based on two central principles:

• To create a place fully integrated with the existing town; and • To develop an overall strategic approach to masterplanning (to avoid uncoordinated piecemeal decisions).

The EbD event was followed in March 2002 by a day-long ‘Technical Planning Event’ which developed in more detail proposals aimed at designing-in health, education, community development and crime reduction considerations. A further consultation event, in September 2002, was also organised by Bovis (by then appointed as the preferred principal developer) followed by a public exhibition in the Swansgate Centre in December 2002. During the course of 2003, the Council held focused workshops to inform the preparation of the Development Framework Supplementary planning Guidance (SPG) and other detailed SPGs for the Neighbourhood Centre, Station Island. These SPGs have now been adopted. A draft East of Eastfield Road Development Brief has also been consulted upon and is currently being amended for re-consultation.

A summary of the key consultation dates is noted below:

• June 2000 - Questionnaire asking people what the focus of the development should be. Issues of crime and violence, education provision, health provision, public transport, congestion and the vitality of the town centre were raised. • May/June 2001 - Workshops with landowners and stakeholders to inform and gain feedback on what the key issues for the development were. • October/November 2001 - Local people were updated at 12 information sessions; key issues to address in Wellingborough East were identified. • November 2001 - A 3 day 'Technical Planning Event' with stakeholders, experts and local representatives attending to identify key issues and create and illustrative plan for Wellingborough East. • March 2002 - A second 'Technical Planning Event' to look at some issues such as education, crime, health, community development, the Town Park and access to East of Eastfield Road in more detail. • September 2002 - An event held jointly by the Borough Council and Forum for the Future to explore the potential to deliver sustainable development through new urban extensions, with a presentation from Jonathan Porritt. • April 2003 - Station Interchange Technical Event - experts attended a workshop to identify key issues with developing the Station Interchange area on Midland Road. • July 2003 - Neighbourhood Centre Workshop - to identify the issues within the Neighbourhood Centre and the community facilities required. • July/August 2003 - East of Eastfield Road Open Evening and Enquiry by Design Event - Open Evening to provide residents and allotment holders with further information and gather their views on development. The Enquiry by Design Event gathered stakeholders, experts and local people together to draw up illustrative plans for East of Eastfield Road. 13 • January 2004 - Development Brief Consultation Public Event - an informal exhibition and opportunity for people to ask questions and a presentation of the three Development Briefs during the consultation period.

Subsequently, in August 2004, an outline planning permission was submitted, to the Council, by Bovis Homes Ltd and other Applicants (including William Davis Ltd, Hallam Land Management and the Wellingborough East Landowners Group). The planning application is for outline planning permission with full details submitted for means of access and all other matters reserved for subsequent approval. The application site comprises 460ha of a mixture of previously developed and previously undeveloped land located on the eastern fringe of Wellingborough in Northamptonshire. It forms the main part of a Strategic Development Area (SDA) allocated in the Development Plan for the site. The outline planning application seeks permission to develop the site as a mixed- use urban extension to Wellingborough town and includes detailed proposals for the required infrastructure works. This application has yet to be determined.

4.2 The Wellingborough East Development Framework SPG (adopted November 2003)

In response to the high level of development pressure to the east of Wellingborough and the identification of the area as a sustainable urban extension area, the Borough Council commissioned the preparation of a development framework for Wellingborough East. The Framework was prepared in consultation with key stakeholders including local authority staff and members, community organisations, landowners, business groups and other statutory agencies.

It is expected that the Framework will be used to coordinate the more detailed Masterplans and the Development Briefs for specific areas and has been prepared as a strategic planning tool to help manage change in Wellingborough and to assist in the assessment of planning applications in the area. In particular the document seeks to establish a framework for considering the cumulative impact of development and sets out a number of key urban design principles for the area and the principles for delivery and implementation.

In summary, the Framework seeks to:

• describe and illustrate how planning and design policies and principles set out in the Wellingborough Local Plan and other supplementary documents should be implemented • reflect the views and values of the local people and stakeholders involved in the process to date and provide a positive basis for furthering the constructive dialogue • articulate and illustrate the vision for taking WEAST forward as an exemplary sustainable urban extension • establish clear urban design principles to ensure that the development achieves the highest possible standards and • explain the next steps that are anticipated in the planning and design of the site.

4.3 Wellingborough East Station Island Development Brief SPG (adopted June 2004)

Policy U17 of the Local Plan commits the Borough Council to prepare Development Briefs for key areas such as Station Island. The Wellingborough East Station Island Development Brief has been prepared to achieve the high design standards expected 14 and to provide the clarity needed for public sector partners and prospective developers alike to implement proposals.

4.4 Pre-Application

Prior to Bovis submitting the main application for WEAST in August 2004, the applicant sought the Council’s opinion on whether it was proper to submit a further detailed application for the Midland Road scheme prior to the determination of the WEAST application and whether a ‘stand alone’ Environmental Statement would be required for the scheme.

The Council responded that a ‘screening opinion’ on the proposed scheme would need to be adopted and that in the event that a full EIA was not required then sufficient information would need to accompany an application in respect of flooding issues, heritage and historic context of the Station and listed buildings, traffic impacts, noise and air quality. Subsequently, the applicant requested a screening opinion in respect of a potential EIA relating to a detailed application for the extension of Midland Road, east across the Midland Mainline and River Ise.

In August 2004, the Council indicated that it considered the proposed scheme to be a Schedule 2 development and had the potential to have significant effects on the environment – an EIA was therefore requested. As a result, in October 2004, Bovis submitted a detailed application for the above scheme together with an EIA, Transport Assessment and other supporting documentation.

5. CONSULTATIONS

1. East Midlands Development Agency - The road proposal is integral to the development as it will provide a central link to the neighbourhood centre and connect the new development to the railway station and to Wellingborough Town Centre. The Urban extension at Wellingborough will also make a significant contribution to the Government’s Sustainable Communities Plan and is in accordance with the Milton Keynes and South Midlands Study Sub Regional Study. EMDA recommends the approval of the application as not only is transport provision hugely important to attract and retain investment but the proposal incorporates the provision of high quality connections to the strategic road network.

2. Environment Agency – Subject to safeguarding conditions, the Environment Agency has no objections to the application. Comments on the applicant’s flood risk assessment are set out in the Appraisal section of this report.

3. Anglian Water – No objection or comment on the proposals .

4. CABE – No comment.

5. Central Networks – No objection.

6. Health and Safety Executive – No objection.

7. English Nature – Advises that it objects to the application on the grounds of the potential adverse impact on the proposed Upper Nene Valley Gravel Pits Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) as a result of the WEAST development.

8. Transco – No objection. 15

9. Midland Mainline – Prior concerns regarding the original submission have now been addressed. No objection to the application.

10. The Wildlife Trust – Object to the application as the application does not recognise the importance of the Nene and Ise Valleys for wildlife and that the proposed impact on biodiversity is not adequately mitigated against. No further comment has been received on the amended application.

11. Borough’s Environmental Protection Section – No objection, subject to safeguarding conditions.

12. Borough’s Economic Development – Supports the constriction of the scheme as it provides a high level of economic potential bringing wider benefits within the main Wellingborough East Development creating access to employment areas within the development providing the opportunity for Wellingborough to create a substantial number of new jobs.

13. Irchester Parish/Wollaston Parish/Ecton Parish/Mears Ashby Parish Council – No objection.

14. Wellingborough Chamber of Commerce - The proposals are not sited at an optimum location as the bridge should be sited to continue the existing line of Midland Road.

15. Northamptonshire County Council (Highways Authority) – Concerns regarding junction and highway designs around the Midland Road/Senwick Road/Eastfield Road junction at 2016 and proposed mitigation measures.

16. Northamptonshire County Council – NCC would be happy to take on the Sustainable Urban Drainage (SUDs) relating to the Highways but not all the SUDs. Although additional information and a management statement are provided on landscape and ecological issues, the supplementary statement does not include the sufficient additional information we advised should be provided on these matters. If a decision on the application to construct the Midland Road Bridge is required at this time then we would wish to work with Borough Council of Wellingborough on design and management proposals for the associated mitigation landscaping works and the Country Park to assess the biodiversity and landscape impact of the approved scheme.

17. Irthlingborough Town Council – Have advised that existing roads need to be upgraded where they meet with new roads; signs denoting weight restrictions and signs diverting lorries away from the centre of Irthlingborough will be necessary; Broadholme sewage works may not being big enough to cope with the expansion of needs; and that a survey is requested to be carried out to assess the environmental and economic impact on Irthlingborough. No further comment has been received regarding the amended application.

18. Mears Ashby Parish Council – No objections.

19. Bozeat Parish Council - would like to see improved public transport from the development, the train station and the Midland Road area in general to the Town Centre. No further comment has been received on the amended application.

16 20. Little Harrowden Parish Council – Would expect a dual carriageway road as the proposal is a primary access route and queries availability of car parking, the impact of the river diversion on development and the potential flooding implications of the development. No further comment has been received on the amended application. Disruption to the railway station slip road is inappropriate and will lead to increased peak-time congestion.

21. Wellingborough Civic Society – Concerns regarding; the use of Irthlingborough Road as an access route between the development and the southern part of the Town Centre, the adverse impact on the Senwick Road/Irthlingborough Road junction, the adverse impacts of additional noise and fumes arising and the loss of parking for station users.

22. The Ramblers Association – objects to the application on the grounds of a lack of information on the effects on rights of way and the Ise Valley. No further comment has been received on the amended application.

23. Castle Residents Association – concern regarding traffic levels and associated air and noise pollution.

Local Consultation

Approximately 3,000 public consultation letters and comment forms were hand- delivered to residents and businesses in the local area for both the original and the revised application on 20th October 2004 and 19 May 2005 respectively. Both applications were advertised in the press and site notices posted.

A total of 31 statutory responses and 72 third party letters were received for the original application and 23 statutory responses and 48 third party letters on the amended application. Although some expressed support for the principle of the scheme, the following is a summary of concerns expressed:

Traffic and Transport • The existing Midland Road cannot accommodate the projected levels of traffic • Road scheme will increase cars taking short cuts • Slip road from Elsden Road into Midland Road should be signalised – Elsden road should be one-way only and heavy goods vehicles banned. • Slip roads should be provided off the Midland Road extension to allow access to Senwick Road and the Town Centre etc • Significant increases in traffic flows will lead to adverse impacts on residential amenity and existing noise and air pollution conditions as well as adversely affecting pedestrian safety in crossing roads • Object to the proposed 71% increase in vehicular traffic • A summary of the alternative road routing/alignment solutions (Ring Roads/Relief Roads, access via Irthlingborough Road, access via Castle Street/Castle Road etc) that were considered prior to selecting the proposed route should be provided • Mitigation proposals to ameliorate the increases in traffic elsewhere on the highway network should be set out • Insufficient consideration is given to further traffic that will be generated on the B571 and Sidegate Lane • Junction arrangements at Elsden/Midland/Senwick Road are unacceptable – an alternative route should be found for Station Island and the area around Midland Road 17 • Traffic lights and pedestrian crossings are essential at Elsden/Midland/Senwick Road junction • Existing speed of traffic needs to be addressed and road access for WEAST via the bridge will make Midland Road even more dangerous • Encouraging further traffic onto existing junctions (Elsden/Midland/Senwick Road) that are already busy will only acerbate current problems – existing roads and junctions are already grid-locked at peak times of the day • Existing traffic calming is ineffective • The construction of a new single carriageway road is insufficient for the large increases in forecast traffic levels • Access to Chester Road needs to be addressed • A proper Eastern Relief Road should be constructed • Proposals to widen Senwick Road will lead to loss of residents’ car parking • Junction with Senwick Drive needs a mini roundabout • Residential roads should be made ‘Residents Only Parking’ (such as Dryden Road, Senwick Road, Mill Road etc) • Increasing traffic along Elsden Road/Eastwood Road must be avoided • The proposals are the ‘least bad’ of all options • The applicant should be obligated to provide the Eastern Relief Road and at the earliest opportunity • Midland Road Bridge extension should be restricted to buses, taxis and cyclists and peak times • A weight restriction on lorries should be imposed to stop heavy vehicles taking Elsden Road/Senwick Road and Midland Road • Elsden Road needs traffic humps to calm traffic and avoid rat runs • More pedestrian crossings should be incorporated into the proposals • Lack of existing car parking for residents • A number of road improvements to other roads (including Elsden Road/Senwick Road and Midland Road) are necessary in conjunction with the Midland Road extension proposals in order to address existing traffic problems • Levels of traffic along Mill Road east needs to be addressed – suggest that a road be branched off for lorries accessing Mill Road industry. Proposed pedestrian and cycle routes are at odds with a heavily trafficked road. Traffic calming measures should also be identified and roads have a weight limit • Permanent proposals for displaced car parking should be included (rather than the temporary solution at Higgins’ Builders Yard) • Proposals for bus services should be clarified • Traffic should not be prohibited from turning right from Midland Road into Senwick Road • The proposed ramp leading to the bridge will adversely affect the rear gardens of properties in Talbot Road and residential amenity (noise/light/pollution/privacy etc) • A new road should be built from Finedon Road and taken away from the Midland Road area • Constriction traffic should not be via Irthlingborough Road • Traffic lights will need to be introduced at the staggered junction • Junction of Irthlingborough Road and Senwick requires management immediately

Environmental • Proposals will exacerbate current problems with noise and pollution in the local area • The creation of significant amounts of waste during the construction period will e problematic • Existing wildlife and landscaping will be lost 18 • The rear of houses in Elsden Road/Midland Road/Senwick Road will suffer from traffic pollution • The impact of the proposals on Riverside and its owners needs to be assessed and appropriate mitigation identified • The proposal adversely impact upon properties at Riverside • Reduced quality of life for residents in Castle Street as a result of increasing volumes of traffic being routed via Castle Street • Town Centre traffic circulation will be significantly affected • The Midland Road/Victoria Road junction needs to be assessed in the Transport Assessment • Significant levels of additional traffic will adversely affect the amenity value of the proposed Ise Valley Country Park • Provision of lighted covered shelters is required for buses • Will the 22 houses in Midland Road/Elsden Road/Senwick Road be offered alternative parking and noise reduction double glazing? • Houses in Eastfield Road will be affected by further traffic

Land Use • Development at WEAST is unnecessary • Creating the Midland Road extension imposes upon the car parking at the station • The road should proceed directly east to continue Midland Road over the railway and not bend round the station • Approve of the proposed natural open space to the east of the station • The station will be dominated by the bridge

Landscaping • Loss of open space and countryside • Significant landscaping should be incorporated for both screening and wildlife purposes • Proposals will be visually intrusive • Visual effect of traffic over the bridge needs to be screened for the houses on Elsden Road • Views to the open fields and Irchester Country Park will be blanked out by the new buildings • Will pedestrian islands only be provided in 2016?

Station Island • Station Island forecourt should be enlarged to enable bus turnarounds

General • Piecemeal approach to planning application submission is unacceptable – especially whilst traffic routing on the main WEAST application is being discussed • Application is premature prior to determination of the WEAST application • Primary route for traffic has to be elsewhere • Elsden and Senwick Road should not be altered • Application is premature in the context of the outline application

Officers are satisfied that the relevant planning considerations have been assessed and addressed through the negotiation on the planning application and safeguarding conditions, in particular those issues relating to the impact on air quality, noise assessment, flood risk assessment, landscape protection, habitat loss and visual amenity. Furthermore, the scheme will bring substantial improvements to the strategic 19 road network as well as investment and economic growth to the area upon its connection to WEAST. It is therefore considered that these benefits outweigh the planning concerns listed above.

6. Appraisal/Material Planning Consideration

The appraisal is divided into the following areas:

• Policy • Principle of the development • Environmental Impact Assessment • Flood Risk Assessment • Design • Transport and Movement • Air and Noise quality • Conclusions

6.1 Material Planning Considerations

6.1.1 The Development Plan

Section 38(6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 (which was brought into force from 28 September 2004) states that if regard is to be had to the development plan for the purpose of any determination to be made under the planning Acts the determination must be made in accordance with the plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise. The development plan for Wellingborough at the local level is the 1999 Adopted Borough of Wellingborough Local Plan and Local Plan Alteration, adopted in March 2004.

6.1.2 National Planning Policy

The most relevant national policy documents are PPS1 (Creating Sustainable Communities), PPS7 (Sustainable Development in Rural Areas), PPG9 (Nature Conservation), PPG13 (Transport), PPG15 (Planning and the Historic Environment), PPG16 (Archaeology), PPG24 (Planning and Noise) and PPG25 (Development and Flood Risk). Relevant national, regional (RSS8) and local planning policy are summarised below.

6.1.3 Planning Policy Statement 1 – Creating Sustainable Communities (2005)

PPS1 replaces PPG1 and forms part of the Government’s Planning Green Paper, ‘Planning – delivering a fundamental change’, published in December 2001.

PPS1 sets out the Government’s vision for planning, and the key policies and principles, which should underpin the planning system. These are built around three themes: sustainable development – the purpose of the planning system; the spatial planning approach; and community involvement in planning.

PPS1 sets out the overarching planning policies for the delivery of sustainable development through planning. PPS 1 emphasises the need for local authorities to integrate the various elements of sustainable development and to seek to achieve 20 outcomes which enable social, environmental and economic objectives to be achieved together. LPAs should:

• promote efficient use of land through higher densities and re-use of land and buildings; • encourage high quality inclusive design over the lifetime of the development; • emphasise the need to integrate the various elements of sustainable development; and • seek to manage patterns of development to reduce the use of the private car and make full use of public transport.

Increasing levels of community involvement are expected and partnership with local communities is seen as a key element in sustainable development: “Local communities should be given the opportunity to participate fully in the process for drawing up specific plans or policies and to be consulted on proposals for development. Local authorities, through their community strategies and local development documents, and town and parish councils, through parish plans, should play a key role in developing full and active community involvement in their areas.” (para. 41)

6.1.4 Planning Policy Statement 7: Sustainable development in rural areas

PPS7 sets out the Government’s broad policy objectives relevant to rural areas in England and its planning policies that will help deliver these objectives. These policies are firmly based on the principles of sustainable development and the need to protect the wider, largely undeveloped countryside for the benefit of all.

6.1.5 Planning Policy Guidance 9: Nature Conservation (1994)

Nature conservation is a material consideration in the determination of planning applications. PPG9 gives guidance on the principles and policies that apply to the integration of nature conservation priorities and land use planning, and the need to take into account of nature conservation interests wherever relevant to local decisions.

The most significant habitats in the proposed WEAST site are understood to be the Ise and Nene Valleys. One Site of Nature Conservation Value is identified in the November 2003 SPG (section 3.9), prepared for the area on behalf of Wellingborough BC.

The Site of Nature Conservation Value is identified as an area of ‘woodland and lake’ (Local Plan Amendment 2004, paragraph A9.63). It is located to the west of the railway, on the site also known as ‘land east of Eastfield Road’, and is surrounded by an industrial estate and allotments. It was identified in association with the Wildlife Trust for Northamptonshire, but is not a statutorily designated site and therefore is not subject to the same level of protection as a SSSI, SAC or SPA under PPG9.

6.1.6 Planning Policy Guidance 13: Transport (2001)

PPG13 outlines the Government’s aim of achieving reduced car dependency via transport and planning policies that are integrated at the national, strategic and local level. PPG13 includes provision of transport infrastructure, including mitigating the impact of new road schemes. Para 15.6 states that new routes should make the best use of existing landscape contours and features and reduce noise and visual effects. They should be designed to minimise the impact on best and most versatile agricultural land and avoid farm severance and disruption to field drainage systems. In the 21 construction of new roads, emphasis is placed on implementation of traffic management measures and the promotion of integration of other modes of transport thus encouraging sustainable transport options.

PPG13 states that “new development should help to create places that connect with each other sustainably, providing the right conditions to encourage walking, cycling and the use of public transport. People should come before traffic.” (paragraph 28).

PPG13 also requires local authorities, when assessing planning applications, to intensify housing and other uses at locations that are highly accessible by public transport, walking and cycling (paragraph 16).

6.1.7 Planning Policy Guidance 15: Planning and the Historic Environment (1994) and Planning Policy Guidance 16: Archaeology (1990)

PPG15 sets out the Government’s policy for the identification and protection of historic buildings, conservation areas and other elements of the historic environment, and the implications for development proposals. PPG16 provides guidance on the preservation and record of archaeological remains and the implications on development proposals.

However, PPG15 and PPG16 are likely to be of minimal significance in the determination of this application, as the site is of low historic interest. It does not contain or form part of a conservation area. The only listed buildings are the railway station and associated goods shed. There are no scheduled ancient monuments within the proposed site and its archaeological interest is considered to be “low in national terms” (Wellingborough East Masterplan, page 17).

6.1.8 Planning Policy Statement 23 – Planning and Pollution Control (2004)

PPS23 replaces the remaining extant parts of Planning Policy Guidance (PPG) Note 23 Planning and Pollution Control published in 1994. PPS23 advises that:

• any consideration of the quality of land, air or water and potential impacts arising from development, possibly leading to impacts on health, is capable of being a material planning consideration, in so far as it arises or may arise from or may affect any land use; • the planning system plays a key role in determining the location of development which may give rise to pollution, either directly or indirectly, and in ensuring that other uses and developments are not, as far as possible, affected by major existing or potential sources of pollution; • the controls under the planning and pollution control regimes should complement rather than duplicate each other; • the presence of contamination in land can present risks to human health and the environment, which adversely affect or restrict the beneficial use of land but development presents an opportunity to deal with these risks successfully; • contamination is not restricted to land with previous industrial uses, it can occur on greenfield as well as previously developed land and it can arise from natural sources as well as from human activities; • where pollution issues are likely to arise, intending developers should hold informal pre-application discussions with the LPA, the relevant pollution control authority and/or the environmental health departments of local authorities (LAs), and other authorities and stakeholders with a legitimate interest; and 22 • where it will save time and money, consideration should be given to submitting applications for planning permission and pollution control permits in parallel and co- ordinating their consideration by the relevant authorities.

6.1.9 PPG24: Planning and Noise (1994)

PPG24 sets out guidance on the assessment of the implications of new development for noise and air quality levels and :

• outlines the considerations to be taken into account in determining planning applications both for noise-sensitive developments and for those activities which will generate noise; • introduces the concept of noise exposure categories for residential development, encourages their use and recommends appropriate levels for exposure to different sources of noise; and • advises on the use of conditions to minimise the impact of noise.

6.1.10 PPG25: Development and Flood Risk (2001)

PPG25 provides guidance on how flood risk should be considered at all stages of the planning and development process in order to reduce future damage to property and the loss of life. The guidance states that:

• The susceptibility of land to flooding is a material planning consideration • The Environment Agency has the lead role in providing advice on flood issues, at a strategic level and in relation to planning applications • Planning Authorities should apply the precautionary principle to the issue of flood risk, using a risk-based search sequence to avoid such risk where possible and managing it elsewhere • Planning Authorities should recognise the importance of functional flood plains, where water flows or is held at times of flood, and avoid inappropriate development on undeveloped land and undefended flood plains • The level of detail of the Flood Risk Assessment will vary depending upon the site and potential flood risk.

Planning policies and decisions should recognise that the consideration of flood risk and its management needs to be applied on a whole-catchment basis and not be restricted to flood plains.

6.1.11 The Sustainable Communities Plan (2003)

The “Sustainable Communities Plan” issued by the ODPM in February 2003 aims to provide for major development in four new growth areas in the ‘Greater South-East’. One of these is Milton Keynes-South Midlands – within which Corby/Kettering/Wellingborough is identified as a key growth node. The intention of the Sustainable Communities Plan is to bring together the best of design and planning to ensure that the built environment in new and expanded communities is of a high standard and the surrounding countryside is protected and enhanced. Wellingborough East is referred to as a good practice case study of partnership working in action.

23 6.1.12 RSS8 (Regional Spatial Strategy for the East Midlands)

Following the enactment of the Planning & Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 Regional Planning Guidance (RPG) became part of the statutory development plan and has been re-named as a Regional Spatial Strategy (RSS).

The former RPG8 was issued by the Secretary of State in January 2002, but certain parts of it were recommended for early review. Consequently, a revised draft of RPG8 was published by the Government Office for the East Midlands in April 2003. This was subject to an Examination in Public in November 2003; the Panel Report was published in March 2004 and the Schedule of Proposed Changes was published in July 2004.

RPG8 (published on 17 March 2005) has become RSS8 and is an important material consideration. The purpose of the document is to provide a clear, agreed, long-term spatial vision for the region up to 2021 and also includes the policies and proposals for Northamptonshire included in the Milton Keynes and South Midlands Sub-Regional Strategy. The Regional Spatial Strategy includes:

• An annual average regional housing provision of 15,925 houses • Detailed policies for Northamptonshire which allow for the increased growth envisaged in the Milton Keynes and South Midlands Sub-Regional Strategy • New policies to promote sustainable economic growth consistent with the region's economic strategy and • A new appendix indicating how policies are to be implemented and measured.

The RSS sets out a number of specific policies for Wellingborough (identified as one of the three growth towns in the Milton Keynes and South Midlands Sub-Regional Strategy (MKSM SRS)) including the location of significant levels of new development. This means that in line with the principles of sustainable communities set out in the Government’s Sustainable Communities Plan (ODPM, February 2003), increased levels of new development will be planned providing new houses, new infrastructure, new facilities and essential services, and new employment opportunities. At Wellingborough the emphasis will be on managing growth and job creation in a sustainable way that realises their potential. It is expected that Wellingborough will accommodate 12,800 over the plan period of 2001—2021.

RSS8 lists a number of schemes for existing and potential future priorities to meet the needs of Northamptonshire both in terms of meeting the growth needs and within the wider context of promoting sustainable transport options. The Midland Road Bridge is identified as a key transport infrastructure project to be delivered 2002-2006. Similar support for the project is also identified in the Milton Keynes and South Midlands Study.

The Milton Keynes and South Midlands Sub-Regional Strategy is a co-ordinated review of policy for the Milton Keynes & South Midlands Sub-Region. The Sub-Regional Strategy forms part of the regional policy basis for the preparation of statutory Local Development Documents by the local planning authorities within the sub-region.

Wellingborough is identified as being capable of accommodating growth in a complementary way, while retaining its own separate identity. The emphasis will be on managing growth and job creation in a sustainable way that realises its potential. The existing role of Wellingborough should be strengthened through the continued provision of a diverse range of quality comparison shopping that meets the needs of both the town as a whole and its wider rural hinterland.

24 The Midland Road Bridge scheme is identified one of a number of schemes that address existing and potential future priorities to meet the needs of Northamptonshire both in terms of meeting the growth needs and within the wider context of promoting sustainable transport options.

6.1.13 Northamptonshire County Structure Plan (March 2001)

The 2001 Northamptonshire County Structure Plan identifies land east of Wellingborough as a Strategic Development Area (SDA) and identifies that the railway station should be developed as a multi-modal interchange. It emphasises the importance of high quality design and sustainable development and the need to plan layout and form to reduce the dependency on the private car. The Plan also promotes the creation of high quality, mixed-use developments which provide a wide range of facilities and services that are well served by public transport.

The Plan’s general strategy for development within Northamptonshire includes the following specific policies:

Policy GS2 – emphasises the need to conserve important environmental assets, minimise the impact on natural resources and make best use of brownfield land within urban areas

Policy GS3 – Seeks to conserve important environmental assets

Policy GS5 – Seeks to promote high quality design and sustainable development

Policy GS6 – States that LPAs will use planning conditions, obligations and other powers to secure the necessary infrastructure, facilities and services to support development

The County Council recognises that, due to environmental and physical constraints, additional locations need to be identified outside the urban areas to accommodate some of Northamptonshire’s future growth. The Plan makes provision for five mixed-use Strategic Development Areas (including to East of Wellingborough)

Policy SDA1 – Development within the Strategic Development Area seeks to encourage the provision of a wide range of facilities and services, provide a balanced range of housing and employment, promoted measures to encourage walking, cycling and use of public transport and seeks the provision of large-scale advanced landscaping and conservation of important environmental assets and natural resources

The Structure Plan’s objectives in relation to planning for ‘transport’ include the reduction of the total amount of travel by private car; increasing bus and rail patronage; minimising the impact of transport on the environment and increasing the number of trips made by cycling and walking:

Policy T1 – (In relation to the ‘Eastern Sub-Area’), the Plan includes the promotion of an improved multi-modal interchange at Wellingborough Rail Station; a network of safe and convenient pedestrian and cycle routes and a Wellingborough Eastern Relief Road

Policy T2 – Promotes the development of integrated transport strategies for Sub-Areas of the County

25 Policy T3 – Promotes the use of the primary road network for long and medium distance road traffic.

Policy T6 – Encourages greater use of buses and encourages the introduction of bus priority measures, improved services and improved bus facilities and infrastructure.

Policy T8 – Indicates measures for the encouragement of walking and cycling

Policy T9 – identifies the requirement for maximum car parking standards and minimum cycle parking standards

The Structure Plan seeks to safeguard and improve Northamptonshire’s environmental assets and natural resources:

Policy AR2 – affords protection to the landscape character of the county. Development proposals should respect the local character and distinctiveness of the landscape

Policy AR3 – affords protection to sites of designated importance for biodiversity and introduces a requirement for developers to demonstrate that, where proposals are likely to affect a County Wildlife Site, there are reasons for the proposal or other considerations which outweigh or overcome the adverse impact.

Policy AR5 – development which will adversely affect landscape features of major importance to wild flora and fauna will be required to include measures to prevent any net loss of biodiversity throughout the county

Policy AR6 - Promotes the protection of nationally important archaeological sites and monuments, the character, appearance and setting of listed buildings and hedgerows protected under the Hedgerow Regulations.

Policy AR8 – Proposals will not be permitted in areas at direct risk of flooding

6.1.14 The Borough of Wellingborough Local Plan 1999 (Including Local Plan Alteration March 2004)

To make sufficient provision for the level of growth set out in the 2001 adopted County Structure Plan, the Borough Council adopted the Borough of Wellingborough Local Plan (including local plan alterations) in March 2004. This sets out the housing and employment policies and proposals as they relate to the town of Wellingborough up to 2016. The 2004 Alteration identified a series of sites throughout the town that altogether will lead to 6,500 new homes and 160 hectares of employment land being developed between 1996 and 2016.

Within the Local Plan the following list of policies are considered to be the most pertinent to the application:

Policy G1 – Promotes development that: is of a high standard of design; will not affect the amenities if neighbouring properties; does not have an adverse impact on the road network and would not prejudice highway safety; and is consistent with the principles of sustainability

Policy G2 – Seeks to ensure that development does not lead to an unacceptable risk of flooding and damage natural and built assets. Flood protection and mitigation measures should be provided as appropriate 26

Policy G9 – Proposals for development will only be granted planning permission if they will not detract from the setting of a listed building

Policy G14 – Proposals for development which would adversely affect the site or setting of archaeological remains of national importance will not be permitted

Policy G15 – On sites where there are archaeological remains proposals for development which do not provide for the preservation of remains in situ will normally be refused

Policy G21 – Seeks to protect woodland, trees covered by a tree preservation order or hedgerows

Policy G22 – Promotes the provision of satisfactory landscape necessary to sensitively integrate development into the local environment

Policy G25 – Development should be designed with regard to the provision of suitable infrastructure and physical works, open space, social, recreational, sporting and educational provision

Policy L14 – protects rights of way

Policy T3 – seeks to protect residential areas, the Town Centre and the B573 from high levels of traffic especially of HGVs

Policy T4 – Planning permission for development proposals in the ‘allocated sites’ will be conditional upon the provision of effective routes for buses

Policy T5 – Promotes the incorporation of safe and attractive footpath and cycleway systems into development proposals

Policy T6 – requires the provision of cycle routes and footpaths shown on the Proposals Map

Policy T7 – requires the provision of satisfactory secure cycle parking facilities at public transport interchanges

Policy T9 – Development proposals for new road must: satisfactorily meet highway standards; not be detrimental to the environment; incorporate a satisfactory landscaping scheme and provide for pedestrians, cyclists, the disabled and public transport

Policy T10 – protects off-street parking facilities where the loss would result in adverse impact on the road network or amenity

Policy U14 – Allocates land at WEAST for mixed use development and sets a number of principles upon which proposals should be based, including; safe and convenient access links, reduced dependency on the use of private cars, the prevention of flood risk, the protection of the character of the countryside and a regulated development programme

Policy U17 – Allocates land between Finedon Road and the Railway for mixed-use development

27 Policy UT1 – provides for the primary road access to Wellingborough East via the A510/A509 in the north and A45 in the south

6.1.15 Supplementary Planning Guidance Supplementary Planning Guidance (SPG) documents are produced to provide further guidance. A number of supplementary planning guidance documents have been prepared to cover Wellingborough East, Station Island, the Neighbourhood Centre and the East of Eastfield Road Development Brief (currently being amended). These are designed to bridge the gap between the development plan and a planning application and have been prepared by the Council to coordinate the more detailed Masterplans and the Development Briefs for specific areas. The documents:

• describe and illustrate how planning and design policies and principles set out in the Wellingborough Local Plan and other supplementary documents should be implemented • reflect the views and values of the local people and stakeholders involved in the process to date and provide a positive basis for furthering the constructive dialogue • articulate and illustrate the vision for taking WEAST forward as an exemplary sustainable urban extension • establish clear urban design principles to ensure that development achieves the highest possible standards • explain the next steps that are anticipated in the planning and design of the area.

There are also a number of other generic SPG’s which are relevant;

• SPG1 – Trees on Development Sites • SPGVIII – Building Better Places: How to Contribute to Sustainable Development • SPG IX – Guidance on the Use of Planning Obligations

6.1.16 Wellingborough East Development Framework (Adopted November 2003)

The Development Framework will be used to coordinate the more detailed Masterplans and the Development Briefs for specific areas. The Development Framework was prepared to ensure Wellingborough East is developed as a series of distinctive ‘places’, rather than ‘estates’. The Framework demonstrates how WEAST can be developed as a natural extension to the existing town and be designed as an exemplar sustainable development. The Framework provides a detailed analysis of the area in terms of its land form, site drainage, access, landscape context etc and provides an urban design framework for development proposals.

The Development Framework states that an extension of Midland Road, providing access to the town centre over the flood plain and across Station Island and the railway tracks via a new bridge traversing the river valley, should be designed to:

• Blend with its surroundings (including a generously landscaped embankment to the eastern side); and • Span the Ise in such a way as to facilitate attractive visual and functional north-south connections along the proposed Ise Valley Country Park.

The existing Midland Road access to the station will also need to be subject to a range of traffic calming and highway geometry improvements, which is most likely to impact on the Higgins’ builders yard site and current station parking and access areas. 28

The Framework goes onto indicate that the new bridge should be a major new feature and a striking new landmark feature that is fully integrated with the surrounding area.

Key considerations in the design of the Midland Road Bridge include the need:

• To accommodate all modes of transport – pedestrians, cyclists, buses and other vehicles safely and comfortably; • For an active edge to the bridge with arches/undercroft spaces accommodating appropriate uses close to the railway station; • To avoid north-south segregation of the Station Island site; • To ensure that it does not create a barrier to movement or blight views along the valley, with wide bridge supports designed to enable safe and attractive northsouth pedestrian links alongside the river; • For the north and south facing elevations of the bridge to be attractively designed and mounding adjacent to the bridge structure to be well-planted so that it blends with the surrounding Town Valley Park landscape; • For the treatment of the area where the bridge touches down on the eastern side to be carefully handled so as to minimise cut-and-fill and enable development to line this important route. • For a high quality design that adds value to the station plaza and befits this key access point to the development.

6.1.17 Wellingborough East Station Island Development Brief (Adopted June 2004)

The Station Island Development Area is situated on the extreme eastern edge of Wellingborough and is bounded by the limits of the Ise Valley Flood Plain to the east, by Finedon Road to the north and by the railway tracks to the west. The area has been allocated, in the Wellingborough Local Plan, for mixed use development and as a Public Transport Interchange to facilitate easy access to and transfer between forms of public transport.

The Development Brief indicates that the extension to Midland Road should serve a major strategic role as Wellingborough East’s principal east-west link and open up local access to the Station Island Site. The new link should be achieved via a bridge extending from Midland Road across the Ise Valley north of the railway station, to link with the new Neighbourhood Centre. The Brief also acknowledges that some of the existing car parking spaces around the station will be lost to make way for the construction of the new Midland Road bridge and that there is potential to redevelop Higgins’ Builders Yard as temporary station car park whilst construction is taking place.

The Development Brief also sets out a number of matters that should be addressed to ensure the railway bridge design is of high quality:

• Engineering considerations should be fully integrated with landscape and architectural design of adjacent areas; • The parapets and safety barriers on the bridge and along its approach should be sensitively designed to avoid negative visual impact; • Excessive use of safety fences such as ‘double box’ beams should be avoided; and • Attention be paid to the aesthetic quality of the bridge elevations.

29 6.1.18 Other Considerations

A range of additional guidance, with more detailed advice, is also applicable, notably: • By Design: Urban design in the planning system” (DETR and CABE, 2000), a companion guide to PPG1. • “By Design: Better places to live” (DETR and CABE, 2001), a companion guide to PPG3 which advises on best practice in housing design. • “Places, Streets and Movement” (DETR, 1998), a companion guide to Design Bulletin 32 which details how highway design should be integrated into designs for residential and mixed use areas. • “Urban Design Compendium” (English Partnerships and the Housing Corporation, 2000), which provides detailed best practice advice on urban design.

6.1.19 Environmental Impact Assessment

This application is of a scale and nature that means it must be assessed in accordance with the Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) England and Wales Regulations 1999. Where EIA is required for an application made in outline, the requirements of the Regulations must be met in full at that stage, since reserved matters applications cannot be subject to EIA.

Following a request by the applicant for a ‘scoping opinion’ from the Council, the following key issues were identified:

• Drainage and Flooding • Heritage • Ecology • Traffic impacts • Construction impact • Noise and • Air quality

Since the submission of an ES with the planning application, the local authority has negotiated a number of revisions to the scheme and requested further information under Regulation 19 of the EIA Regulations. These changes required the submission of a revised Environmental Statement and Transport Assessment, which was submitted on 18 May 2005. The additional environmental information was advertised in accordance with the Regulations and includes:

• Topographical survey information in relation to highway design • impact on air quality from the proposed levels of traffic figures • modelling methodologies in the calculation of impacts on air quality • details of the methodology, parameters and assumptions made in deriving the data upon which noise assessments are made • cumulative noise effects of the new road and existing traffic, including rail noise • flood risk assessment information • further detailed information on the proposals for landscape protection and enhancement and habitat creation • mitigation measures and evidence in terms of the long term impacts resulting from habitat loss and • visual assessment of the proposals in terms of their potential impact on the Station Area

30 Following these amendments it is considered that the Environmental Statement complies with the Regulations.

Any representations received on the content and the scope of the Environmental Statement are also considered to be part of the ‘environmental information’ under the Regulations.

6.2 The Principle of the Development

The proposed scheme provides a 1km extension to the eastern end of Midland Road. The scheme includes the construction of two new bridges together with river works to provide flood compensation.

The development of a direct link from WEAST to the existing Town, and links both to the north and south to connect to the strategic road network are essential to ensure appropriate and safe access to and from the proposed development at WEAST. The Midland Road extension is a particularly critical element of the applicant’s access strategy in this context and will also provide an essential link between the existing town and the proposed development.

There is a strong policy context that establishes the development’s access requirements and in turn supports the access strategy contained within the outline application and particularly the Midland Road Extension application. As noted above, the MKSM and RSS8 state in Northamptonshire Policy 4 that new development should be planned to take account of the committed transport investment and further transport provision indicated in Figure 7, which specifically refers to the Midland Road extension and new interchange facilities at the station, to facilitate a modal shift to public transport. It continues to state that high quality public transport services should be provided to connect key centres of housing, employment and service activities.

In conjunction with Northamptonshire Structure Plan Policies and Wellingborough Local Plan policies, the WEAST Development Framework SPG specifically refers to a new access opportunity (para 4.1.9) in relation to the extension of the Midland Road providing access to the Town Centre over the flood plain and across station island and the railway tracks via a new bridge traversing the river valley. In addition para 4.1.13 indicates that the existing Midland Road access to the station will need to be subject to a range of traffic calming and highway geometry improvements. The Station Island SPG also indicates that (para 3.6.4) the Midland Road will serve a major strategic role as Wellingborough East's principal east-west link, and at the same time open up local access to the Station Island site. This new link will be achieved via a bridge that will extend from Midland Road across the Ise Valley north of the railway station, to link with the new Neighbourhood Centre.

An optioneering report has also been submitted setting out the parameters within which the Midland Road extension alignment has been designed as well as the route options which were considered at the inception stages of the design process. The report identifies the range of technical and environmental constraints that informed the route options as well as the precise alignment of the proposed Route 4. The Council agrees that the nature of the built form and the presence of the railway line and River Ise have limited the range of options that could accommodation the new central link. Further, once all of the technical and environmental constraints are considered that the proposed alignment of the extension represents the most feasible option. 31 Therefore, subject to design and other matters, it is considered that, in principle, the provision of the Midland Road extension complies with national, regional and local planning policy. Furthermore, the scheme will bring substantial benefits in terms of:

• Connection to the trunk road network • Provision of full permeability with all parts of the existing town • Dissipation of the impact of development • Provision of appropriate infrastructure to allow development of public transport system and • Reduction of traffic impact on existing urban area

6.3 Flood Risk Assessment

The extension of Midland Road to cross the railway and River Ise is the main link between the new WEAST development and its core neighbourhood centre and the town centre. The highway is generally on embankment and flood mitigation measures are proposed upstream of the proposed river crossing.

The drainage and flooding issues relating to the site have been subject to extensive consultation with the approving authorities including the Environment Agency, Borough Council of Wellingborough, Northamptonshire County Council and Anglian Water. The Council has classified the development as ‘essential infrastructure’ – a classification that has been justified in the Borough’s Local Plan, the WEAST Development Framework SPG and paragraph A9.50 of the Local Plan in relation to the importance of the multi- modal interchange at the existing station.

Given the policy framework and the need in terms of sustainable development to link the new development allocation to the existing town the alignment and location of the bridge and road through the floodplain is considered to be wholly exceptional in as much as there is no viable alternative for the route to follow.

The provision of the infrastructure is also required to allow access to the development allocation to enable the future growth of the town.

Significant consultation has been undertaken for the overall Development Framework for WEAST and the specific Development Brief for Station Island which includes the link road, rail bridge and bridge across the River Ise. Alternative routes have been considered and since March 2000 when an initial feasibility study was undertaken for the Council and the developers have also appraised other routes. A direct alignment of the road across the floodplain from Midland Road was discounted on the grounds that the change in levels would require a very long bridge structure to be required on the western side of the railway and this would blight a very large area of this part of the town and would not be feasible. Similarly, Mill Road was considered and the existing bridge structure and road width back into town was felt to be insufficient for the level of traffic that would be using it and the impact on that road too great. Mill Road is a narrow residential street with properties set close to the highway and with limited off street parking.

The present alignment allows for the development of the station multi-modal interchange and also provides the sustainable link for the development with the existing town centre which will increase its viability and ensure as far a possible that Wellingborough East does not become a purely commuter settlement that is predominantly car based which looks to other centres for the provision of goods and services. 32 PPG25 states in paragraph 23 that ‘In [these] functional flood plains, the government considers that build development should be wholly exceptional and limited to essential transport and utilities infrastructure that has to be there. Such infrastructure should be designed and constructed so as to remain operational even at times of flood, to result in no net loss of flood-plain storage, not to impede water flows and not to increase flood risk elsewhere’.

It is considered that the infrastructure proposed by the Midland Road bridge and road within the flood plain is wholly exceptional and that the design and construction of the infrastructure that has been undertaken by the applicant in correspondence with the Environment Agency is such that it enables the flood plain to remain operational even at times of flooding with no net loss of flood plain storage or increase the risk of flooding elsewhere.

6.4 Design

Detailed design has been carried out, by the applicant, for the junctions on Route 4, including the provision of a signal controlled junction at the staggered at Elsden Road/Midland Road and Midland Road/Senwick Road, a signal controlled junction to the south of the Railway Station and a roundabout at the junction with Station Island, North South Route.

As noted above, Route 4 will provide the direct link from WEAST to the Railway Station and then to the Town Centre. It commences at the Midland Road/Senwick Road/Elsden Road staggered cross roads junction, and continues in an easterly direction along the remaining length of Midland Road to a new signal controlled cross roads junction with the existing Station Approach Road, access to the Royal Mail Sorting Office and a modified access to Wellingborough Main Line Railway Station. Northwards from this junction, Station Approach will be re-aligned to the west of the station complex, the forecourt area of which will be refurbished. To the north of the station the route rises over the railway, to provide the necessary headroom set by Network Rail and continues in an easterly direction over Station Island, the River Ise and into the site.

It is considered that the philosophy for the design and alignment of Route 4 is in accordance with the aims and objectives of the WEAST SPG, including:

• Ensuring WEAST is strongly linked to the existing town via the rail station axis • Ensuring WEAST is highly accessible by public transport • Prioritising the needs of pedestrians, cyclists and public transport users ahead of private motor cars • Blending with its surroundings • Spanning the River Ise in such a way as to facilitate attractive and functional north south connections along the proposed Ise Valley Country Park

Route 4 has also been designed to incorporate sufficient carriageway and footway widths to encourage pedestrian and cycle movement between WEAST, the railway station and the Town Centre and to ensure that the majority of its length will be governed by a 30 mph speed limit.

As to the elevational treatments of Route 4 the character of the road has been designed so as not to harm the character and setting of the listed station buildings by passing at grade. Whilst a retaining wall is required along the western boundary to the Midland Road extension footpath, the applicant has reduced its height from 8 metres to 1-3.5 33 metres in height. The re-designed retaining wall will be clad in a similar red brick to the station with other design features to be agreed in consultation with the Council.

With regards the station forecourt area, the applicant has been in dialogue with the Council and has submitted illustrative material demonstrating the design proposals and proposed furniture and materials.

Whilst the rail bridge has been designed taking into account a number of technical constraints, including crossing the rail line, the Council is in agreement with the applicant that the position, orientation and scale of the bridge, wing walls, parapets and safety barriers have been designed to minimise the physical and visual intrusion on the station area.

The river bridge span has also been designed to allow the provision of a footpath under the bridge connecting the two proposed parks with the brick cladding to the span reflecting the existing station building materials.

The development proposals retain existing landscape features as far as possible and provide new structural planting close to and along the embankment to help in breaking up the bridge structure. The height of the embankment has also been minimised to reduce its impact on the floodplain hydrology and visual amenity of the area and includes new planting to help its integration into the park.

The proposals are based on a sound analysis of the surrounding area and are the result of extensive consultation. The scheme is in compliance with policies in the Built Environment Chapter of the Local Plan and Structure plan as well as policy objectives in the Councils SPGs. The scheme has been sensitively deigned to integrate with the surrounding area and ensures limited impact on the existing townscape. The scheme also accords with national and regional policies on creating a safe and accessible environment.

Given the above, it is considered that the proposals are in accordance with relevant Structure Plan and Local Plan policies regarding design, landscape and visual amenity.

6.5 Transport and Movement

The Highway Authority (Northamptonshire County Council) has considered the amended Transport Assessment (submitted May 2005) and other supporting information in relation to the transportation and highway design aspects of the revised application. In advising the Council, the Highway Authority has noted that not only should all new roads or improvements to existing roads be to requisite standards but also proposals should not, at a future date, result in detriment to road users due to the ratio of projected traffic flows to capacity, increased journey times or queue lengths (i.e. ‘nil detriment’).

With regards to the Midland Road extension, the Highway Authority has advised on two particular aspects:

• Effects on the Midland Road/Senwick Road/Elsden Road junction; and • Proposals for providing signals, safer crossings for pedestrians and improved capacity on the Senwick Road and Elsden Road approaches

Effects on the Midland Road/Senwick Road/Elsden Road junction

34 Without WEAST, Midland Road would terminate at the Station and even with substantial development elsewhere in Wellingborough; the traffic flow would remain modest in the design year (2016). With WEAST and the continuation of Midland Road through to the new Neighbourhood Centre, it is recognised that traffic flows will be substantial and in peak periods the condition of ‘nil detriment’ (i.e. result in no detriment to road users due to the ratio of projected traffic flows to capacity, increased journey times or queue lengths) could not be met without substantial capacity improvements along Midland Road and at the junctions with Elsden Road, Senwick Road, Victoria Road and elsewhere in the town centre. However, such capacity improvements sufficient to meet the ‘nil detriment’ condition could not be achieved without acquiring land and possibly demolishing property.

The Highway Authority recognises that, at this time, such a course of action would not produce a sustainable solution in terms of current national, regional and local transport/highway policy objectives and would likely induce further traffic growth to the area.

The Highway Authority’s view is that if it were simply a case of widening Midland Road approaching and through the Midland Road/Senwick Road/Elsden Road junction then a condition of nil detriment being met regardless of whether it means acquiring property or not would be recommended. However, providing extra capacity for car travel along the Midland Road Axis including the approach to this junction would make the route attractive to other, non-WEAST traffic and would be contrary to the principles of sustainability.

The County Council has therefore recommended that, in lieu of a condition ensuring nil detriment on the Midland Road approach to the junction, the applicant contributes to a multi-modal/route corridor study covering the corridor between the Town Centre and the Station and further contributes a sum to be agreed towards a solution based on the study.

Proposals for providing signals, safer crossings for pedestrians and improved capacity on the Senwick Road and Elsden Road approaches

Given that the northbound and southbound approaches to the Senwick Road and Elsden Road junctions, will carry substantial volumes of traffic in the peak hours in 2016 (even without the development) the applicant has submitted a scheme for providing signals, safer crossings for pedestrians and improved capacity on the Senwick Road and Elsden Road approaches.

However, an initial ‘Stage 1 Safety Audit’ of the scheme has concluded that the two lane approach northbound on Senwick Road is substandard in width and vehicles alongside each other, particularly if alongside a goods vehicle or a bus, risk side to side collisions or being squeezed into potential collision with the refuge island or nearside kerb. Taken together with the substandard width of the lanes and the narrowing of the footways both in Elsden Road and on both sides of Senwick Road, the safety auditor has recommended that a single lane approach to the junction should be adopted unless additional highway width can be obtained.

The Highway Authority acknowledges that if there is an irreconcilable conflict between meeting ‘nil detriment’ and providing a safe junction, then safety is paramount. The Highway Authority has therefore confirmed that it is disposed to waive the requirement for ‘nil detriment’ on the Senwick Road approach to the junction provided the Safety Auditor’s recommendations are followed or his concerns met by a revised design. In the 35 event that the approach to the junction is not revised the Highway Authority is unwilling to accept the liability of a design which fails a Safety Audit.

Given the above, it is recommended that additional conditions are imposed to ensure that a multi-modal study/route corridor study covering the area between the Town Centre and the Station is carried out and its recommendations implemented and that a revised detailed highway scheme incorporating proposals for providing signals, safer crossings for pedestrians and improved capacity on the Senwick Road and Elsden Road approaches, is submitted to and approved by the LPA prior to the first 300 housing occupations on land between Finedon Road and the Railway, Neilson’s Sidings and Land North of Finedon Road, Wellingborough .

The Borough’s Wellingborough East SPG (Nov 2003) indicates that a maximum of 300 dwellings for the neighbourhood centre can be served off Irthlingborough Road without further necessary junction/highway works. Therefore it is considered that 300 dwellings can be occupied prior to highway works on the Midland Road/Senwick Road/Eastfield Road being carried out.

6.6 Air Quality, Noise and Construction Impact Assessment

Further to the submission of the original application in October 2004, the Borough’s environmental protection section advised that (and sought further information through the Council’s ‘Regulation 19’ letter):

• An assessment of the impacts of the proposed development on air quality and appropriate mitigation measures should have been identified • The impact on air quality and data for noise from the proposed levels of traffic figures should be presented in terms of the development of phases on the WEAST site and the provision of transport infrastructure • All relevant issues, which had the potential to impact significantly on local air quality within the WEAST development area and also in the surrounding existing urban and rural area, should have been considered • The methodology, parameters and assumptions made in deriving the data upon which the noise assessments were made should be identified • An assessment of the impacts of the completed scheme, 15 years after the commencement of development was required • Road sections should be shown on a map with levels at individual properties detailed • Noise locations should be shown on a map • The cumulative noise effects of the new road and existing traffic, including rail noise should be identified. • Absolute levels of noise affecting individual properties or sections of property on Midland, Elsden and Senwick Roads should be detailed and mitigation measures provided and • The relationship between the levels of the bridge and the houses behind should be clarified and assessed

Subsequent to the concerns raised above, the Council received a revised Supplementary Environmental Statement (ES) on 18 May 2005. The revised ES contains a new Traffic and Transport assessment which assesses the impact until 2016 - the proposed period for completion of the whole development rather than the 2012 scenario previously detailed. 36 The Council’s Environmental Protection Service has considered the additional information and has advised that in terms of road traffic noise the assessment considers the potential impacts from road and construction traffic as a result of the development, as well as the cumulative effects with the other major noise source in the area, railway noise. It assesses the impact against categories of change in noise. It also calculates and assesses the resulting noise levels against the standards for noise insulation works to dwellings made under the Noise Insulation Regulations (NIR) which is applied where new roads and road alterations are carried out. Due to the requirements of the NIR, the traffic figures used are until 2021, 15 years after the proposed scheme commencement.

In traffic and associated noise terms there are two distinct effects of the proposal. Firstly there is the effect upon properties at the junction of Elsden Road, Senwick Road and Midland Road. This will mainly be upon front ground and first floor living rooms and bedrooms. The other properties affected are those on Talbot Road and Riverside, Mill Road, adjacent to the new road and bridge, which experience an increase in noise at the rear of the houses and in gardens. These properties will also be most exposed to any construction impacts.

The Council agrees with the applicant’s assertion that an increase in traffic noise is an inevitable consequence of higher traffic numbers and for Elsden and Senwick Roads this will occur regardless of the proposal. The increased traffic use of Midland Road is a consequence of its strategic use as the main route between Wellingborough East and the town centre. This is reflected in the assessment of the number of properties for which there is a moderate adverse impact.

Having identified the potential impacts the assessment suggests appropriate mitigation. In the case of Elsden, Senwick and Midland Road this consists of the NIR “scheme” that may be applied to eligible dwellings around the junction. The scheme could include acoustic insulation of doors, windows and the provision of ventilation to eligible rooms on the front, and where applicable side elevations of the properties. Such a scheme would normally be administered by the Highway Authority, but in this case is likely to form part of an agreement between them and the applicant as part of the Section 38 Road Adoptions, and Section 278 Works in the Public Highway.

In the case of Talbot Road and Riverside, Mill Road it is proposed that the provision of noise barriers will mitigate the impact to acceptable levels. In order to ensure the effectiveness of the barriers it necessary to pay particular attention to the extent, construction and detailing. It is therefore recommended that if the application is approved a condition is included to ensure a scheme is submitted and implemented for the erection of noise barriers which is acceptable to the LPA.

With regards to traffic noise the assessment has also provided information on the likely construction impacts. It recognises that noise will inevitably be produced and that consideration of items such as siting of plant, temporary barriers, and the use of best practice, etc should be employed to mitigate the construction impact. This can be best addressed by including a condition, in any approval requiring an Environmental Risk Assessment/ Construction Method Statement to be submitted and approved to control all unacceptable construction impacts.

In terms of the impact of the proposals on existing air quality, the assessment includes modelling of a number of pollutants. Only two are significant Nitrogen Dioxide NO2 and Small Particles PM10. Four locations were selected to be representative of the likely changes in pollutant concentrations due to the increases in traffic figures predicted by the Transport Assessment. The assessment concludes that while there are increases in 37 both pollutants, as a result of increased traffic, there is not likely to be any exceedences of relevant Air Quality Objectives. The appropriate mitigation is included in the overall proposals for transport in the Transport Assessment, Wellingborough East Travel Plan and Bus Cycle and Walking strategies. Further, as the assessment indicates, the Borough Council will monitor the resulting air quality and hence the effectiveness of these measures, under its duties under the Air Quality Management regime. It is therefore considered that given there is no likelihood of exceedences of Air Quality Objectives the Air Quality impacts assessed from traffic are acceptable and no conditions are necessary.

The assessment also considers the likely dust creation during construction which will particularly affect dwellings close to the new road works. It proposes a range of measures to mitigate against the various temporary impacts. Works of this nature require detailed application of appropriate measures. A condition should therefore be attached to any planning permission requiring an Environmental Risk Assessment/Construction Method Statement to be submitted and approved to control unacceptable impacts.

Construction Impact

The applicant has identified a number of potential impacts arising from construction of the scheme and has proposed a range of mitigation measures that include agreement with the planning authority for the management of construction traffic including specified routes and diversions. The routes specified by the applicant include the use of Sidegate Lane from Finedon Road and the western side of the railways is likely to be via the Embankment and Senwick Road. A number of safeguarding conditions are therefore recommended.

6.7 Ecology

PPG9: Nature Conservation sets government policy on the relationship between land- use planning and nature conservation. The guidance emphasises the importance of locally designated sites and that the presence of a protected species is a material consideration when a local planning authority is considering a development proposal. The guidance states that local authorities should consider attaching appropriate planning conditions or entering into planning obligations under which the developer would take steps to secure the protection of identified habitat.

The proposed development is not predicted to have a significant adverse effect on the ecology of the application area which consists mainly of improved pasture and arable land. The nature conservation value is mainly attached to the hedgerows and the river Ise. Unfortunately It is unclear how much of the existing hedgerows will be retained and the trees which are mainly associated with them. Badgers are a protected species and their territory extends over the area. Provision will need to be made for them in the design. Although the area does not contain any sites of nature conservation value there are significant areas beyond. These should not be directly affected by the proposals. The proposed development of the country park with reintroduced meanders to the river Ise and the creation of reed beds, wet grassland and wet woodland offers great potential for enhanced biodiversity. The County Council’s ecologist refers to the Biodiversity Action Plan for Northamptonshire and considers that the current mitigation measures are insufficient and in some cases inappropriate and wishes to be involved in the evolution of the design of this substantial part of the whole town park and the all important management plan without which the design proposals will not succeed.

38 Notwithstanding the above, it is proposed to attach a number of safeguarding conditions in relation to the approval of a comprehensive landscape scheme and the protection of existing trees and hedgerows.

Recommendation:

Recommend that the approval of the grant of planning permission subject to conditions be delegated to the Director of Environment and Economy upon prior signing of a section 106 agreement related to the landowners covenanting with the LPA to ensure that .no more than the first 300 housing occupations on land between Finedon Road and the Railway, Neilson’s Sidings and Land North of Finedon Road, Wellingborough, will be allowed until such time that the improvements to the Midland Road/Senwick Road/Eastfield Road junction and approaches have been implemented in accordance with a scheme to be submitted to and agreed with the Highway Authority.

Conditions:

1. No development authorised by this permission shall take place unless in accordance with the Approved Drawings (dwg ref. – 04 1633.12.001A Planning Application red line plan) (highway drawings 611071/A1/R4/11 Rev B, 611071/A1/R4/12 Rev A, 611071/A1/R4/13 Rev A, 611071/A1/R4/14 Rev A, 611071/A1/R4/15 Rev A, 611071/A1/R4/16 Rev A, 611071/A1/R4/17 Rev A, 611071/A1/R4/18, 611071/A1/R4/J1 Rev B, 611071/A1/R4/J2 Rev C, 611071/A1/R4/B11 Rev A, 611071/A1/R4/B12, 611071/A1/R4/B14 Rev A, 611071/A1/R4/B15, 611071/A1/R4/B19 Rev A, 611071/A1/R4/B20 Rev A or any subsequent amendments approved by the local authority.

2. No variation to the approved plans shall be made which in the reasonable opinion of the Council creates new environmental impacts which exceed the range or scale of those assessed and measured in the EIA dated May 2005 and/or which the Council considers may require further or additional mitigation measures.

Reason: In order that the development is carried out in accordance with any necessary mitigation for the purposes of the Environmental Impact Assessment and in order that the development complies with the Approved Plans.

3. The development to which this permission relates shall be commenced by the later of:

a. The expiration of a period of 5 years commencing on the date of this permission b. The expiration of a period of 2 years commencing on the date upon which the final approval of the details of the last reserved matter is given by the planning authority

Reason: In accordance with Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, to prevent the accumulation of unimplemented permissions

4. Surface Water drainage works and source control measures shall be carried out in accordance with details submitted to and approved in writing by the local authority before the development commences.

Reason: To prevent the increased risk of flooding

39 5. No development shall commence until precise details of a scheme to allow the safe access across the bridge by Otters has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The bridge shall not be used by vehicular traffic until the otter pass has been installed in accordance with the details so approved.

Reason: To ensure the safe egress of Otters during high flow periods

6. No development shall commence until floodplain compensation in accordance with the submitted details shown in the revised Flood Risk Assessment received 18 May 2005 have been provided and made available for flood storage.

Reason: To ensure the development does not increase flood risk elsewhere through reduced level for level floodplain storage

7. Prior to development commencing a suitable scheme to maintain the existing standard of flood risk protection to the Ise floodplain including the existing metal recycling plant shall be submitted for approval to the LPA and the scheme shall be carried out in accordance with the details so approved.

Reason: To ensure the development does not increase flood risk elsewhere through reduced level for level floodplain storage

8. Prior to development commencing details of a long term management programme for flood storage areas and new flood defences including means of controlling invasive landscaping and means of delivery shall be submitted and approved by the LPA.

Reason: To ensure the development does not increase flood risk elsewhere through reduced floodplain storage or flow attenuation.

9. Unless otherwise agreed in writing with the LPA development shall proceed with the details, phasing and maintenance responsibilities set out in the flood risk assessment.

Reason: To reduce flood risk

10. The Council’s standards will be adopted where the road is to be adopted as public highway.

Reason: To ensure that road infrastructure is provided in accordance with the Council’s standards.

11. Before the commencement of the development, details of the materials to be used for the surfaces of the road and associated bridge infrastructure shall be submitted to and approved by the local authority. The development shall be in accordance with such details as approved.

Reason: In order that the local authority may be satisfies as to the details of the proposal.

12. The development as hereby permitted shall not commence until the applicant has secured the implementation of a programme of archaeological work in accordance with a written scheme of investigation (including any work necessary to preserve remains in situ and/or by record), or watching brief, as appropriate, which has been 40 submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The relevant works shall only take place in accordance with the detailed scheme or brief pursuant to this condition.

Reason: To ensure that potential archaeological remains are recorded.

13. The developer shall afford access at all reasonable times to any archaeologist nominated by the local planning authority and shall allow that person to observe the excavation and record items of interest and finds.

Reason: To enable archaeological investigation of the site.

14. Prior to the commencement of development, details of foundation design and any other below ground disturbance shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority Development and shall take place strictly in accordance with the approved details, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: To ensure that potential archaeological remains are recorded.

15. An Environmental Risk Assessment and construction method statement to address the potential environmental impact of construction shall be submitted and approved by the Local Planning Authority prior to the construction commencing. This shall be implemented during construction and shall include the following:

i. An Environmental Risk Assessment which addresses the detail of the environmental impact of all demolition and construction work. This shall incorporate method statements to control or mitigate all of the identified impacts. ii. The assessment shall include information upon noise, vibration, dust, operating hours, construction lighting, parking, construction traffic access routes. iii. In respect of noise, vibration and dust emissions it shall address the identification of sensitive premises, suitable mitigation, use of plant and equipment, mitigation measures such as barriers and environmental monitoring. iv. The assessment shall include details of the site management of environmental impacts, including control of subcontractors, contact details, public relations and information systems.

Reason: To limit the detrimental effect of demolition and construction works on adjoining residential occupiers by reason of nuisance.

16. Prior to the start of construction a detailed scheme for the location, design and construction of noise barriers shall be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority. The agreed scheme shall be implemented prior to the new road sections being opened to traffic.

Reason: To ensure that appropriate mitigation is carried out so that the proposed development does not prejudice the amenities of occupiers of neighbouring properties.

17. Prior to the start of construction details relating to the routing of construction traffic shall be submitted to and approved by the local planning authority. The agreed scheme shall be implemented in accordance with such details as approved. 41

Reason: To limit the detrimental effect of construction works on adjoining residential occupiers by reason of nuisance

18. Before the development hereby permitted commences, details of the materials to be used for the external surfaces and hard surfaced areas shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The development shall be implemented in accordance with such details as approved.

Reason: To safeguard the visual amenities of the locality.

19. A scheme of hard and soft landscaping including details of existing trees and hedgerows to be retained shall be submitted to and agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority before the development hereby permitted, is commenced.

Reason: To ensure a satisfactory appearance to the development and that all components of the development are integrated at the outset.

20. All works comprised in the approved scheme of landscaping shall be carried out before the end of the first planting and seeding season following completion of the development.

Reason: To ensure a satisfactory appearance to the development

21. Any existing tree shown to be retained or trees or shrubs to be planted as part of the approved landscaping scheme which are removed, die, become severely damaged or diseased within 5 years of the completion of development shall be replaced with trees or shrubs of appropriate size and species in the next planting season.

Reason: To ensure a satisfactory appearance to the development.

22. Before the development is commenced details of the location, extent and depth of all excavations for drainage and other services in relation to trees on the site shall be submitted and approved by the local planning authority and the development carried out in accordance with such approval.

Reason: To safeguard the health of existing tree(s) which represent an important amenity feature.

23. No site works or works on this development shall be commenced until temporary fencing shall have been erected around existing tree(s) in accordance with details to be submitted in writing by the local planning authority. This fencing shall remain in position until after the development works are completed and no material or soil shall be stored within these fenced areas.

Reason: To safeguard the health of existing tree(s) which represent an important amenity feature.

24. The type and treatment of the materials to be used on the bridge’s facades and culverts shall be approved in writing by the local planning authority prior to the development being carried out. The approved materials and treatment shall be used in the construction of the development hereby approved.

42 Reason: To safeguard the visual amenities of the area and to ensure proposals are of a high standard of design in preserving the setting of the listed railway buildings

25. No development shall take place until the applicant, or their agents or successors in title, has secured the implementation of a programme of archaeological work in accordance with a written scheme of investigations which has been submitted and approved by the local planning authority.

Reason: To ensure that there is an opportunity to properly investigate and record information on the site which is considered to be of archaeological interest

26. The developer shall afford access at all reasonable times to any archaeologist nominated by the local planning authority and shall allow that person to observe works and record items of interest and finds.

INFORMATIVE

• The applicant is advised that photographs of the existing highway immediately adjacent to that used for access/egress and delivery of materials to the site will be required by the Highways Authority prior to the commencement of the construction works. Any subsequent damage to the public highway resulting primarily from the works, as shown by the photographs, including damage caused by delivery vehicles to the construction works, will be made good to the satisfaction of the Highways Authority and at the expense of the applicant. Attention is drawn to Section 59 of the Highways Act 1980 in this respect.

• In connection with the approved development, the applicant’s attention is drawn to the guidance produced by the Health and Safety Executive on contaminated land “protection of Workers and the General Pubic during the Development of Contaminated Land” which can be obtained from HSE Books.

The developer, all contractors, sub-contractors, consultants engaged in any form of engineering or construction work within the Site should apply the principles of the Construction Industry’s Board’s “Considerate Constructor Scheme”, and consider the merits of formally registering the Site with the Board. Main contractors should be encouraged to enter into discussion with the local authority to develop a method statement to ensure that matters such as noise and dust from the construction process do not become a nuisance as the development proceeds.

• The developer, all contractors and sub-contractors engaged in any form of construction work as part of the development should employ the principles of current best practice.

• In particular due regard should be made to BS 5288 “Noise and vibration control of construction and open sites”, and “Control of dust from construction and demolition activities BRE 2003, and the principles of the Construction Industry Boards “Considerate Construction Scheme”

• The land in question was historically raised out of the floodplain and it seems clear that there is a major opportunity to reinstate the natural regime for storage and flood flow conveyance by relocating the recycling area. The development of such an option could potentially balance some of the additional loss of floodplain envisaged in other areas such as crossings and the rail related development. We would urge 43 all parties involved in this process to take a long term view and the Environment Agency would be pleased to discuss and help promote a more sustainable solution.

• The applicant’s attention is drawn to the advice received from Central Networks in relation to operational apparatus and responsibilities in relation to Health and Safety.

BOROUGH COUNCIL OF WELLINGBOROUGH AGENDA ITEM

Regulatory Committee 12/10/2005

Report of the Director of Environment and Economy

APPLICATION REF: WP/2005/0474/F

PROPOSAL: Two bedroom detached bungalow - amended plans received 19 September 2005.

LOCATION: Land adjacent to 108 London Road, Bozeat.

APPLICANT: Malcolm Jarvis.

This application has been referred to the Regulatory Committee for determination because an objection has been received from the Bozeat Parish Council.

PROPOSAL AND DESCRIPTION OF SITE: Demolition of an existing flat roofed garage and erection of a two bedroom bungalow.

An amended plan has been received on 19th September 2005 that illustrates a new vehicular access for no. 108 London Road, with a new access for the proposed dwelling together with off road parking/turning provision for both.

The site is part of the applicant’s rear garden area which has a commodious flat roofed garage situated at its southern end. Adjacent to the garage in Mill Road are other flat roofed garages that are slightly taller than the garage on the application site due principally to the slightly raised ground level. On the western boundary of the site is a close boarded fence with a hedgerow that is growing to a height of approximately 2m. Beyond the western boundary is no. 44 Mill Road which is a semi detached bungalow that has a very similar design to the application plan. In no. 44’s flank elevation that faces the proposal are 2 windows; one of which serves a bathroom and the other a kitchen. The kitchen however does have the benefit of another window that faces onto the rear garden area. Located in the intervening 3m gap between no. 44’s flank wall and the boundary fence is a shed that measures as 2m high at the boundary fence. The residential development nearby displays a wide variety of designs and exterior facing materials and no. 108 together with its adjoining neighbour are built close to the back edge of the highway. The application site currently has one vehicular access and a gravelled off road car parking area. The ground level of the application site generally slopes down gently from the south to the north.

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY: Various permissions for alterations to the dwellinghouse on the site have been granted over the years together with others that are listed below:

BW/79/842 Erection of building for glass cutting and as retail outlet and construction of new vehicular access – refused. H ERS 7 RN

3 WA

258900 3 258900 S 5 EL BY 8 GA 3 Well RD EN M S Path I L

R 5

O 8

7 A 7 8 4

D 7

7 6 7

S '

T 7 3

6 1 L 1 0 3 9 1 588 W 588 8 1

0 E 1 1 4

H 1 9

4 3 4 1 S

T MARY 1 'S R 4

9 OAD 8 9 D

O 4 1

3 R E

N 0

3 O

2 D

1 0

ON 5

L E

3 4 D

0 I

TCB 8 L 116 I

H 2 587 587

2 1

1 1

28 b

1 2 2 a

87.2m

1 5 El

Sub Sta 1 2 8

4 1

1 2 154

LIT 1 258600 TLE CLOSE 4 258600 490400 490600

1 905 2

LB 7

1 2 a 3

Scale 1:1250

9 7

8 5 45 BW/80/282 Construction of vehicular access and site for garage – conditionally approved. WP/2005/0068/F Dormer bungalow – refused.

The reason given for the above refusal is “The proposal is contrary to policy GS5 of the County Structure Plan and G1.1 and G1.2 of the Borough of Wellingborough Local Plan. The dwelling by way of its lack of amenity space would result in a development that has a cramped, overdeveloped and incongruous appearance in the street scene. The proposal would also have an unacceptable detrimental effect on the standard of amenities that are currently enjoyed by the occupiers of no. 44 Mill Road, Bozeat.”

NATIONAL AND LOCAL PLANNING POLICY: Northamptonshire County Structure Plan – GS5, H1, H3 H6. Borough of Wellingborough Local Plan – G1, G4, H1, H3, H12, T9 and T10. Supplementary Planning Guidance – Parking, Building Better Places and Planning Out Crime. Planning Policy Statement 1; Delivering Sustainable Development. Planning Policy Guidance 3; Housing. Planning Policy Statement 7; Sustainable Development in Rural Areas. Northamptonshire County Council – Design Guide for Residential Roads.

SUMMARY OF REPLIES TO CONSULTATIONS/REPRESENTATIONS RECEIVED: 1. NCC Highways – comments regarding the revised accesses details will be reported via the later letters list.

2. Environmental Development and Protection – is content with the content of the submitted Environmental Risk Assessment.

3. Bozeat Parish Council – does not object to the application but expresses concern regarding the following issues:

• Vehicle access/manoeuvring arrangements • Reference to site being very cramped

4. Neighbours – objections have been received from the occupiers of 42, 44 Mill Road, 99 and 103 London Road and the writers have raised the following issues:

• Loss of privacy • Opinion that the proposal will resemble a house due to the steep angle of the roof • Height of the proposal is out of character with the area • Reference to nearby building activity • Detrimental visual impact of the proposal • Increase in vehicular traffic and parking/manoeuvring difficulties will cause highway danger • Belief that highway land has been protected for a lay-by/bus stop • Overdevelopment of the site • Loss of light • Lack of off street parking • Lack of amenity space

46 ASSESSMENT: Material planning considerations:

• Compliance with policy • Effect on the visual amenity of the area • Effect on neighbours amenities • Off street parking • Crime and disorder

Compliance with policy The site is brownfield and within the built up confines of a restricted infill village. The proposal therefore is considered to accord with the elements of national guidance and development plan policies that relate to achieving new housing development on previously developed sites in the rural area.

Effect on visual amenity of the area The diversity of the street scene has been mentioned above and it is considered that the modest scale of the proposed building with the backdrop of a similarly designed bungalow in Mill Road will not present an incongruous feature in the street scene. Mention has been made by objectors that the proposal will result in an overdevelopment of the site but this concern can be assuaged if an appropriate condition is imposed that requires the existing garage on the site be demolished before the bungalow is first occupied.

Effect on neighbours’ amenities It is accepted that the scheme will have an effect on the standard of amenities that are currently enjoyed by the occupiers of no. 44 Mill Road but it is considered that the possible detrimental effect on the amenities of its occupiers will be insufficient to warrant withholding planning permission for the following reasons:

• The single storey nature of the proposed development will result in no unacceptable loss of privacy. • The proposed bungalow is positioned to the east of no. 44 and it is true that its position in relation to the movement of the sun during the day will result in some loss of sunlight in the morning for the occupiers of no. 44. However, the plans illustrate a 1m gap to the common boundary and there is a 3m space on the objectors side of the fence and this space when combined with the low roof heights of 3.9m and 3.3m of the scheme will result in an acceptable standard of light reception in the kitchen which does have the benefit of two windows. • The spacing between the existing adjacent bungalow and the proposal has been described above and it is considered that the massing effect of the new building will be acceptable within the built up confines of a village.

Off street parking The Parish Council and nearby residents have raised this issue as a reason for objection. It is considered that there is sufficient room on the site as a whole to accommodate an adequate standard of off road car parking provision for both dwellings that could be satisfied by way of a condition. It is considered therefore that the lack of off road car parking cannot be stated as a reason for refusal.

Crime and disorder There are not considered to be any crime and disorder issues pertinent to the determination of this application.

47 RECOMMENDATION: Approve with conditions.

Reasons: 1. Required to be imposed pursuant to S51 of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004. 2. In the interests of visual amenity. 3. In the interests of protecting the residential amenity of the occupiers of the adjacent dwelling and to prevent the site from becoming overdeveloped. 4. In the interests of protecting the residential amenity of the occupiers of the adjacent dwelling and to prevent the site from becoming overdeveloped. 5. In the interests of the safety and convenience of users of the adjoining highway/s. 6. To ensure that the development is carried out in accordance with the agreed amendments. 7. In the interests of amenity and privacy.

INFORMATIVE/S 1. Pursuant to Section 54A of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, 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: Northamptonshire County Structure Plan - GS5, H1, H3 H6 Borough of Wellingborough Local Plan - G1, G4, H1, H3, H12, T9 and T10 Supplementary Planning Guidance - Parking, Building Better Places and Planning Out Crime. Planning Policy Statement 1; Delivering Sustainable Development 48 Planning Policy Guidance 3; Housing Planning Policy Statement 7; Sustainable Development in Rural Areas Northamptonshire County Council - Design Guide for Residential Roads. 2. The applicant is advised that this decision relates to the following drawing numbers received on the date shown: 19th September 2005 3. The applicant is advised that planning permission does not automatically allow the construction of the vehicle crossing, details of which require the approval of the Highway Authority. In this regard you should contact the Area Maintenance Engineer, Northamptonshire County Council - Atkins, Highways Depot, Harborough Road, Brixworth, Northamptonshire, NN6 9BX, tel. (01603) 883400 prior to any construction/excavation works within the public highway.

BOROUGH COUNCIL OF WELLINGBOROUGH AGENDA ITEM

Regulatory Committee 12/10/2005

Report of the Director of Environment and Economy

APPLICATION REF: WP/2005/0487/F

PROPOSAL: New bungalow to rear.

LOCATION: 30 Mulso Road, Finedon.

APPLICANT: Mr Tunn.

PROPOSAL AND DESCRIPTION OF SITE: The application site is currently garden land to the rear of No. 30 Mulso Road, Finedon. The site is within the confines of the Finedon Villages Policy Line. Finedon is defined as a Limited Development Village in the Borough of Wellingborough Local Plan. Residential properties are located to the north east, north west and south west of the site. Open countryside is found to the south. Fencing runs along the boundary between no. 30 Mulso Road and no. 31. This is 2 metres in height for part of the boundary and 1 metre for the remainder. Hedging and shrubbery run along the boundary with the open countryside. Hardstanding is currently found to the side of no. 30 Mulso Road. Mulso Road is comprised of semi-detached two storey dwellings and appears to have a lack of off-road parking.

This application seeks planning permission for a bungalow on the site described above with access to the side of no. 30 Mulso Road. This access will serve both the proposed and existing dwellinghouses.

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY: It is considered that there is no planning history relevant to the determination of this planning application.

NATIONAL AND LOCAL PLANNING POLICY: G4 and H2 Borough of Wellingborough Local Plan. Supplementary Planning Guidance VIII: Building Better Places.

SUMMARY OF REPLIES TO CONSULTATIONS/REPRESENTATIONS RECEIVED: 1. Highways Authority – recommends that the highway standards and planning conditions set out in the NCC document ‘Minor Planning Applications that have an effect on the highway’ be applied to this planning application.

2. Finedon Parish Council – objecting to backland development.

3. Third Parties – two letters have been received. One letter of objection and one raising concerns. Grounds of objection are as follows:

U e N g IO 3 N 7 5 a r S a T G 5 R 492400 492200 E T 's 3 © Crown Copyright. All rights reserved. C r 5 E e a T T BWP/2005/0487/FA d S Borough Council Of Wellingborough: Licence No.100018694. Published 27/09/2005il d M

6 u r IA

6 L

a 8 4 3 923 B Y IL 1 W 5 272000 272000

U 2

4 A N

T 1 I E 2 O 6 PH E N R S

T T S 4 R M E A LI IL W 3 9 7

2 5 S D 1 R 4 O 9 F X

1 4 5 5

3 7 6 2 D A O 6 M 5

U R

3 E 2 L S N

O R

O 4 6 6 R H 90.9m 7 O T A W D A 719 8 H 719

7 7

2 8

3 5

1 7

9 2

718 718

271700 271700

492200 923 492400 Scale 1:1250 50 • Existing parking and access problems would be exacerbated by the development. • Overdevelopment. • Bungalow would be out of character with the area. • Proposed off-road parking would create noise and fumes. • Loss of light. • Lack of privacy. • Noise pollution. • Provision of sewerage and water pipes.

4. Senior Environmental Health Officer – the environmental risk assessment submitted is acceptable.

ASSESSMENT: This application seeks planning permission for a bungalow on garden land to the rear of no. 30 Mulso Road with access being provided to the side of this existing property. This access will serve both the proposed and existing dwellinghouses.

Finedon is defined as a Limited Development Village in the Borough of Wellingborough Local Plan. In such cases, residential development is permitted by virtue of Policy G4 provided it will not have an adverse impact on the size, form, character and setting of the village and its environs. Policy H2 of the Local Plan sets out criteria that residential development in the Limited Development Villages needs to meet if it is to be permitted. Once again these are framed to ensure that residential development proposals will not have an adverse impact upon the size, form, character and setting of the village and its environs.

It is considered that the proposal constitutes an unacceptable form of development in this location. Approval would result in a development that would have a materially detrimental impact on the character and setting of the village in the vicinity of the site and would potentially set a precedent for future development in the area.

It is however considered that the proposed dwelling would not have a materially adverse impact on the amenities currently enjoyed by neighbouring occupiers in terms of loss of light or loss of privacy. Windows have been sited in order to minimise the impact on neighbouring properties. Although there is fencing of only 1 metre high running along the boundary shared with no. 31 a scheme for screen fencing could be agreed to overcome this issue.

Supplementary Planning Guidance (SPG) VIII states that dwellings should have a minimum rear garden depth of 10.5 metres. In this case whilst the proposed bungalow has a rear garden depth exceeding this required distance, the existing dwelling would only retain approximately 8.6 metres. This however could be overcome by the re-siting of the proposed bungalow.

Overall the principle of residential development in the proposed location is considered to be an unacceptable form of development. It would have a detrimental impact on the character and setting of the village in the vicinity of the site and would be contrary to Policies G4 (2) and H2 (2) of the Borough of Wellingborough Local Plan.

RECOMMENDATION: Refuse.

1. The proposed development would be contrary to Policies G4 (2) and H2 (2) of the Borough of Wellingborough Local Plan in that if permitted it would result in overdevelopment of a site restricted by open countryside to the southeast and would be detrimental to the local area. Furthermore the development would be detrimental to the character and setting of the village in the vicinity of the site.

POLICY G4

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

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

LIMITED DEVELOPMENT VILLAGES ARE: EARLS BARTON; FINEDON AND WOLLASTON RESTRICTED INFILL VILLAGES ARE: BOZEAT; ECTON; GREAT DODDINGTON; GREAT HARROWDEN; GRENDON; HARDWICK; IRCHESTER; ISHAM; LITTLE HARROWDEN; LITTLE IRCHESTER; MEARS ASHBY; ORLINGBURY; SYWELL EXCLUDING THE OLD VILLAGE; AND WILBY

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

POLICY H2

TO ENSURE A LEVEL OF PROVISION COMMENSURATE WITH THEIR STATUS AS THE PRIMARY LOCATIONS FOR RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT IN THE RURAL AREA, PLANNING PERMISSION WILL BE GRANTED FOR RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT WITHIN THE VILLAGE POLICY LINES OF THE LIMITED DEVELOPMENT VILLAGES OF EARLS BARTON, FINEDON AND WOLLASTON PROVIDED THAT THE PROPOSAL:

2. WILL HAVE NO ADVERSE IMPACT UPON THE SIZE, FORM, CHARACTER AND SETTING OF THE VILLAGE AND ITS ENVIRONS.

52 INFORMATIVE: The applicant is advised that this decision relates to the following drawing number received on the date shown: Drawing Number: Date Received: 0185 16th August 2005 53

BOROUGH COUNCIL OF WELLINGBOROUGH AGENDA ITEM

Regulatory Committee 12/10/2005

Report of the Director of Environment and Economy

APPLICATION REF: WP/2005/0528/F

PROPOSAL: Conversion of barn to two private dwellings.

LOCATION: The Tithe Barn, High Street, Irchester.

APPLICANT: Morris-Cook Developments Limited.

Consideration of this application was deferred at the September meeting of this Committee to see if an amended scheme could be negotiated to move the 3 garages from within the main building around to the rear of the building at the western end and for the brick buttress on the front elevation to be replaced by a stone buttress.

ASSESSMENT: The applicant has considered the situation and advises as follows:

We acknowledge your Members concern regarding the positioning of the garages and are pleased to comment as follows:

Consideration has been given to the siting of the garages elsewhere outside of the area of the application site. The purchase of the only additional land available would be non- viable, and would also detract from allowing the pleasant development of the remaining house plot for which outline permission has already been granted by your Council.

Location of the garages in the ‘west addition’ portion of the proposed ‘House 2’ cannot be achieved as this section of the property is only four metres deep, i.e. insufficient to house a family vehicle. Demolition and rebuilding to a larger plan format would not be met with approval by your Conservation Officer.

The suggestion was made that the positioning of garage doors within the main barn façade is visually unacceptable. This would have been totally acceptable had a previous farmer-owner created them, a feature which may now then been ‘listed’ as part of the building’s historic attributes.

In conclusion, the positioning of the garages has been approved by your Conservation Officer in the granting of the Listed Building Consent, and has been considered and accepted by the Northants County Council highways engineer during the consultation process.

These comments are noted and it is therefore accepted that the best solution is for the 3 garages to remain as proposed. 3 6

Court 0

492400 492600

o t

WP/2005/0528/F 1 9 s Borough Council Of Wellingborough: Licence No.100018694. Published 01/09/2005 9

925 8 o

a 266100 266100 H Cemetery P

A 7 R

R 2 E 6 1 I Y N 18 WA G 'S E NE ARI Carpente R ATH Arms

S 20 T K (PH)

G 1

1 5 m

D 7

9 . 3

N 1

4 1

S 3 6

1 1

8 6

2 St Katharine's Church . 8

8 2 M 660 B 660 St Katharine's Church

3800 7 Irchester Manor 8 House LB 63.0m Manor Fm

Cottage 6

The 5

Barn 7

6 9 6 Am 10 Hal 659 659 ILL OL H 6 SCHO 2

5 1 1 a

6 1 Slope

y 5

6 b

i PH L Irchester County Infants School El 65.3m

Sub Sta 7 4

5 5

4 7 2

5 2

5 0

Irchester 4 8

3 County 8 3

5 Junior 51 School E LAN OOL 265800 H T 265800 SC 4 7 E 492400 Village 492600 h E t e 925

l r 3 t R

a Hall 8 n T e

5 e Scale 1:1250 1

1 4 S H

2 C

H 3 4 12 13 G 9 I 5 3 3 H D A 6 11 1 7 O 3 5 R 54

Consideration has also been given to the replacement of the brick buttress with a stone one. However, the brick buttress is shown on the scheme that has already been granted Listed Building Consent by the Council. Its retention is therefore acceptable to the Council’s Conservation Officer and it is considered unreasonable to now ask for it to be changed.

Overall, the scheme should be approved as detailed on the submitted plans.

RECOMMENDATION: Approve subject to the following conditions:

1. The development shall be begun not later than the expiration of three years beginning with the date of this permission. 2. Samples of the materials to be used for external cladding of the walls and roof of the new dwelling shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority before any development is commenced. 3. The new stonework shall be laid in level courses with a mortar mix normally comprising 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. 4. Full details of the proposed treatment of all existing openings in the Tithe Barn together with details of all new windows (including roof lights) and doors and details of their surrounds shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority before any development is commenced. 5. The rainwater goods to the development shall be cast aluminium painted black. 6. Details of the upgrading of the driveway including the proposed surface treatment and method of surface water drainage shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority before any development is commenced. The dwellings shall not be occupied until the works agreed have been completed to the satisfaction of the local planning authority. 7. No development shall take place until the applicants, or their agents or successors in title, have secured the implementation of a programme of building recording in accordance with a written brief provided by Northamptonshire County Council (tel (01604) 237093) and that this record has been submitted by the applicant and approved by Northamptonshire County Council and the planning authority.

Reasons: 1. Required to be imposed pursuant to S51 of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004. 2. In the interests of visual amenity and to protect the character and setting of the listed building. 3. In the interests of visual amenity and to protect the character and setting of the listed building. 4. In the interests of visual amenity and to protect the character and setting of the listed building. 5. In the interests of visual amenity and to protect the character and setting of the listed building. 6. In the interests of highway safety. 7. To ensure the recording of any historical interest in the site. 55

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

BOROUGH COUNCIL OF WELLINGBOROUGH AGENDA ITEM

SITE VIEWING (Date of visit 13th September 2005 at 3.00 p.m.)

Regulatory Committee 14/09/2005

Report of the Director of Environment and Economy

APPLICATION REF: WP/2005/0528/F

PROPOSAL: Conversion of barn to two private dwellings.

LOCATION: The Tithe Barn, High Street, Irchester.

APPLICANT: Morris-Cook Developments Limited.

This application has been brought before the Committee because it is subject to more than two objections plus a request from the Parish Council for Site Viewing.

PROPOSAL AND DESCRIPTION OF SITE: Conversion of former Tithe Barn into two dwellings. This is a Listed Building in a very poor state of repair.

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY: WP/96/524 Conversion of Tithe Barn to 1 dwelling plus construction of new detached house and garage - approved and renewed as WP/2001/0096 and WP/2004/0239. Listed Building Consent also granted under reference: WP/96/525/LB Renewed as WP/2001/0097/LB and WP/2004/0240/LB. WP/2005/0374 Conversion of Tithe Barn to two dwellings - withdrawn. WP/2005/0375 Listed Building Consent for conversion of Tithe Barn to two dwellings - granted.

NATIONAL AND LOCAL PLANNING POLICY: Policies G1, G8, G9 G10, H2 and H12 of the Borough of Wellingborough Local Plan.

SUMMARY OF REPLIES TO CONSULTATIONS/REPRESENTATIONS RECEIVED: 1. County Highway Authority – subject to compliance with the notes appended to the application plan no objection is raised to the proposal on highway grounds. On a practical point it must be confirmed that sufficient space exists to enable vehicles to turn into the garages and parking space. It is recommended that an aisle width of 6m is available to achieve this manoeuvre satisfactorily.

2. Borough of Wellingborough, Amenity Services Manager – the Council operates a three bin curtilage collection service. Therefore, allowance should be made for the storage of three bins at each property. These bins should be presented for collection on the boundary of the nearest public highway, in this case, on High Street. 57

3. Irchester Parish Council – request a site visit as these plans have been resubmitted.

4. Northamptonshire County Council, Built and Natural Environment Team - we have no objection to the principle of conversion to residential use, but we would recommend that if planning/listed building consent is granted then a condition should be attached to the consent(s) to ensure that an appropriate record is made of the building before the conversion works. The following wording may be useful: “No development shall take place until the applicants, or their agents or successors in title, have secured the implementation of a programme of building recording in accordance with a written brief provided by Northamptonshire County Council (tel (01604) 237093) and that this record has been submitted by the applicant and approved by Northamptonshire County Council and the Planning Authority.’’

5. Third Parties – six letters of representation received. The main points made are as follows;

a. The scheme is an over development of the site and the Tithe Barn should only be used as one dwelling not two in accordance with a previous permission. b. There are highway, access, traffic and parking problems with the development. The proposal will also result in an overall development which exceeds the number of dwellings normally allowed to be served off a private drive. c. The proposal will cause unacceptable changes to the character of this Listed Building and also have an adverse impact on other nearby properties. d. The development will result in a number of windows and roof lights which will overlook nearby properties. There is a restrictive covenant in place which prevents windows which cause overlooking of nearby properties and also works on the boundaries. There are overlooking issues from the proposed gardens and the back wall which adjoins the barn should be increased in height to address privacy concerns for nearby properties. e. The development will have inadequate outside amenity space. f. There should be no attachment to the boundary wall of number 14 School Hill. g. Part of the roof of the barn is asbestos. This should be removed by specialists to ensure no problems. h. A wall that was previously been demolished should be rebuild in accordance with discussion with the previous owner.

ASSESSMENT: This is an application to convert the Listed Tithe Barn into two dwellings. A similar application was withdrawn earlier this year after concerns from the Council’s Officers on the following grounds:

1. There were a considerable number of new openings compared to the existing building and an existing permission to convert the building to one dwelling. It was considered that these would have had an adverse effect on its character and the surroundings. 2. A large chimney was proposed for the main gable. It was considered that this would have significantly affected the character of the building. 58 3. The proposed roof did not contain a mix of slates and pantiles as exist on the current building. 4. The number of concerns from the Highway Authority had not been met.

The applicant has considered these points, discussed the matter with the Council’s Conservation Officer and submitted an amended application which reduces the openings in the building, includes a much smaller stove flue in place of the chimney and now proposes a mixture of slates and pantiles for the roof. He has also met with the Highway and has addressed their concerns subject to a number of improvements being carried out to the access (as shown on his plans) and there being adequate manoeuvring space to gain access to the proposed garages. He has subsequently confirmed that there is approximately 5.7 metres to access the garages.

There is still a large amount of concern from nearby residents and the points they raise will be considered in turn:

Possible over development of the site

The scheme will involve the conversion of an existing building and will result in no more built development than exists at present. Any increase in disturbance as a result of two dwellings compared to the one that is already permitted is not considered sufficient to justify refusing the application.

Highway, traffic and parking issues

As described above, the applicant has met with the Highway and has addressed their concerns subject to a number of improvements being carried out to the access (as shown on his plans) and there being adequate manoeuvring space to gain access to the proposed garages. Two parking spaces are provided for each dwelling in the form of garages. This is considered acceptable in terms of the adopted county wide SPG on Parking. He has subsequently confirmed that there is approximately 5.7 metres to access the garages. This is only slightly less than the Highway Authority’s suggested distance and, bearing in mind this is on a private drive, this is not considered sufficient to justify refusing the application. There are therefore considered to be no reasons to justify refusing the application on these grounds.

Impact on the Listed Tithe Barn and nearby Listed Buildings.

This amended scheme has been discussed with the Council’s Conservation Officer and he considers it acceptable in these respects. It has been considerably improved since the design in the application that was withdrawn and it is considered that a refusal of the application on these grounds cannot be justified.

Impact on nearby amenity.

The proposed development will result in some overlooking towards adjacent properties. However, any overlooking has been restricted by the use of roof lights wherever possible and will be largely into gardens rather than directly into the windows of nearby properties. Some additional screening is proposed for the outside amenity space. Any impacts in this respect are therefore considered insufficient to justify refusing the application.

59 Private amenity space

Each of the properties will have a small garden area. One will measure 12 metres wide by 4 metres long and the other will be approximately 9 metres by 8 metres square. These areas are considered adequate for a barn conversion of this nature.

Other issues

Matters relating to possible covenants and the presence of asbestos are covered by other legislation and are not relevant planning considerations. Similarly, the previous demolition of a wall by a previous owner is noted but is not a consideration in the acceptability of this scheme. Number 14 School Hill appears sufficiently distant so as not to have its boundary affected. However, even if it is, this is protected by the Party Wall Act. Finally, the applicant’s agent has indicated that sufficient space will exist on the site for refuse bins and recyclables as required by the Council.

Conclusions

Overall, the proposal is considered acceptable and will enable the reuse of a Listed Building to prevent it falling into further disrepair.

RECOMMENDATION: Approve subject to the following conditions:

1. The development shall be begun not later than the expiration of three years beginning with the date of this permission. 2. Samples of the materials to be used for external cladding of the walls and roof of the new dwelling shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority before any development is commenced. 3. All new stonework shall be laid in level courses with a mortar mix no stronger than 1:3 (lime: sand (5 parts soft/4 parts sharp)) with the mortar brushed back to the back arrises of the stonework whilst still green. 4. Full details of the proposed treatment of all existing openings in the Tithe Barn together with details of all new windows (including roof lights) and doors and details of their surrounds shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority before any development is commenced. 5. The rainwater goods to the development shall be cast aluminium painted black. 6. Details of the upgrading of the driveway including the proposed surface treatment and method of surface water drainage shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority before any development is commenced. The dwellings shall not be occupied until the works agreed have been completed to the satisfaction of the local planning authority. 7. No development shall take place until the applicants, or their agents or successors in title, have secured the implementation of a programme of building recording in accordance with a written brief provided by Northamptonshire County Council (tel (01604) 237093) and that this record has been submitted by the applicant and approved by Northamptonshire County Council and the planning authority.

Reasons: 1. Required to be imposed pursuant to S51 of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004. 60 2. In the interests of visual amenity and to protect the character and setting of the listed building. 3. In the interests of visual amenity and to protect the character and setting of the listed building. 4. In the interests of visual amenity and to protect the character and setting of the listed building. 5. In the interests of visual amenity and to protect the character and setting of the listed building. 6. In the interests of highway safety. 7. To ensure the recording of any historical interest in the site.

BOROUGH COUNCIL OF WELLINGBOROUGH AGENDA ITEM

Regulatory Committee 12/10/2005

Report of the Director of Environment and Economy

APPLICATION REF: WP/2005/0595/O

PROPOSAL: Renewal of planning permission WP/2002/0567/O for 1 no. additional dwelling.

LOCATION: All Saints House, 26 Middle Street, Isham, Kettering.

APPLICANT: Mr J F Davis.

PROPOSAL AND DESCRIPTION OF SITE: The application site is land that currently forms part of the garden area to the side of All Saints House, Middle Street, Isham. The site is a corner plot which is bounded by highway to the east (South Street) and north (Middle Street). A stone wall runs along the road frontage. All Saints House is a two storey, stone, Grade II Listed Building which together with its garden curtilage is positioned within the conservation area. Two storey semi-detached dwellings are located along South Street to the east of the site. A two storey detached property is located at the northern end of South Street. Semi- detached bungalows which lack off-road parking facilities are found to the north west of the application site. There are predominantly two storey properties on the southern side of Middle Street to the south west of All Saints House. Dormer bungalows (1.5 stories) are found on the northern side of Middle Street.

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY: WP/2002/0567/O 1 additional dwelling – approved with conditions.

The above application was approved with conditions on 6th November 2002. The current application is a renewal of this previous permission. There are no changes to the application that was previously approved.

NATIONAL AND LOCAL PLANNING POLICY: H3, G1, G4, G9 and G12 of the Borough of Wellingborough Local Plan.

SUMMARY OF REPLIES TO CONSULTATIONS/REPRESENTATIONS RECEIVED: 1. Isham Parish Council – no objections providing the application is the same as previously agreed.

2. Highways Authority – recommends that the highway standards and planning conditions set out in the NCC document ‘Minor Planning Applications that have an effect on the highway’ be applied to this planning application.

3. Third Parties – two letters of objection and a petition containing 12 signatures objecting to the scheme.

T H E

274100 2741001 E The Lilacs E N (PH) A 1 L 1 L IL M

e 3

35 a 1 Isham 33 h Farm C H STREET RC

HU 1

4 6 C 2

2 2

1 0 2

25 3

2 5

1 0

3 S 4 O 5 T U 0 39 S T LE H D ID S M T 740 740

6 8 All Saints 25 House

1 J 9 u 1 b 3 P 8 il 7 A e 1 ET R e

E K T 36a R 1 T C e S r

L r 15 E 2 O a LB L S c

1 D E e 1 ID 3

M 7

6 6

4 5 9 6 7

ET 2 RE Grey ST

T 2 1 Gables U 8 3 SO

739 739 8 Tithe Barn

0 1

8 e 1

4 2 1

O The Brambles

6 6 R 1

E 3 Allerton House A

ck 273800 Tra 273800

488600 887 488800 Scale 1:1250 62 Grounds of objections are as follows:

• Current parking and access problems in the area of Middle Street. • Parking on pavements can lead to dangerous situations where people are forced to walk on the road at times where there are high levels of vehicles and speeding vehicles. • Proposed development will reduce the availability of on-street parking which is particularly vital to nearby elderly or disabled residents and required due to visits by health representatives or family members. • Increase in light and noise pollution. • No provision is made to improve the parking situation by the new dwelling’s access.

4. Department of Housing and Community Development, Borough of Wellingborough – no objections.

5. Health and Safety Executive (Hazardous Installations Directorate) – as the proposed development is within the Safeguarding Zone of a licensed explosive site, the details have been forwarded to HSE’s Explosive Inspectorate for their consideration.

6. Conservation Officer, Borough of Wellingborough – a dwelling on this plot would in principle be consistent with Plan Policies G9 and G12.

ASSESSMENT: This application seeks renewal of planning permission WP/2002/0567/O which was granted conditional approval on 6th November 2002. No changes have been made to this previously approved application. The application seeks to retain the current permission for the principle of residential development with all other matters reserved for later approval.

Policy H3 regarding restricted infill villages permits small scale residential development within the village policy line subject to a number of criteria. It is considered that a proposed dwelling in this location would not have an adverse impact upon the size, form, character and setting of the village and its environs. It is considered that the site is capable of accommodating a single dwellinghouse. The principle of residential development is therefore considered an appropriate form of development for this location. It is considered that a proposed dwelling could be sited so that the amenities of neighbouring properties would not be adversely affected. This would however be considered in the determination of a reserved matters application.

The comments of the Conservation Officer are awaited at the present time. However it is considered that development of the site for a single dwellinghouse would preserve the form, character and appearance of the conservation area and the wider area. It is also considered the setting of the Grade II Listed Building All Saints House would not be detrimentally affected. Although the development of the site would require demolition of part of the stone boundary wall along the road frontage it is felt that only a small section would need to be removed and that this would not harm the appearance of the conservation area.

The objections of the neighbouring occupiers regarding access and parking are appreciated. The Highways Authority however has raised no objection on highway grounds. Details regarding access and parking arrangements will be the subject of further approval. 63

RECOMMENDATION: Approve.

1. Application for approval of reserved matters must be made not later than the expiration of three years beginning with the date of this permission and the development must be begun not later than whichever is the later of the following dates: (a) the expiration of five years from the date of this permission; or (b) the expiration of two years from the final approval of the reserved matters or, in the case of approval on different dates, the final approval of the last such matter to be approved. 2. Before any development is commenced, detailed plans, drawings and particulars of the siting, design, drainage and external appearance of the proposed development and the means of access thereto, together with landscaping and screen walls/fences shall be submitted to and approved by the local planning authority and the development shall be carried out in accordance therewith. 3. Prior to the commencment of the development full details of both hard and soft landscaping works shall be submitted and agreed with the local planning authority. These works shall be carried out as agreed. 4. Prior to the commencement of the development a detailed site layout plan showing all new development, menas of access and off-street vehicle parking/turning arrangements shall be submitted and apporved by the local planning authority. The works shall be carried out in accordance with the agreed details. 5. After demolition works, the boundary wall shall be made good to the satisfaction of the local planning authority. 6. Development shall not begin until a scheme to deal with contamination of the site has been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The scheme shall include an investigation and assessment to identify the extent of contamination and the measures to be taken to avoid risk to the public/buildings/environment when the site is developed.

Reasons: 1. Required to be imposed pursuant to Section 92 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990. 2. To secure satisfactorily planned development. 3. To ensure that a satisfactorily landscape scheme is provided in the interests of well planned development. 4. To ensure that adequate space is provided within the site for off-street parking, turning, loading and unloading and that the development shall have a satisfactory means of access, in the interests of highway safety and the convenience of users of the adjoining highway. 5. To preserve and enhance the setting of a listed building and the character of the conservation area. 6. To avoid any detrimental effects from contamination.

BOROUGH COUNCIL OF WELLINGBOROUGH AGENDA ITEM

Regulatory Committee 12/10/2005

Report of the Director of Environment and Economy

APPLICATION REF: WP/2005/0627/C

PROPOSAL: Erection of a single storey extension to create a new play room, reception area, toilets and a food preparation room.

LOCATION: Ruskin Infants School, Ruskin Avenue, Wellingborough.

APPLICANT: NCC - Education Services.

PROPOSAL AND DESCRIPTION OF SITE: This is an application which involves the creation of a new play room, reception area, toilets and food preparation area at Ruskin Infants Nursery School.

The application is being dealt with by the County Council and the Borough Council is a consultee.

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY: None relevant.

NATIONAL AND LOCAL PLANNING POLICY: Policies G1 and L2 of the adopted Borough of Wellingborough Local Plan.

SUMMARY OF REPLIES TO CONSULTATIONS/REPRESENTATIONS RECEIVED: As this is an application dealt with by the County Council, the Borough Council has carried out no consultations.

ASSESSMENT: It is proposed to build additional accommodation at the school to provide day care provision for an additional 26 children as a local satellite facility for the new childrens’ centre at Croyland Nursery School.

Policies G1 and L2 of the Local Plan allow for proposals of this nature providing they are of an acceptable design and do not create problems for their surroundings. Related to this, care should be taken to ensure that proposals do not cause problems in terms of parking provision.

It is assumed that extra staff will be employed to work in the extension. Care should therefore be taken to ensure that there is sufficient parking provision on the school site to accommodate any extra staff that are employed.

There are a number of residential properties nearby but all are considered to be sufficiently distant so as not to be adversely affected by the proposal in terms of affects on their amenities, particularly as the extension is only single storey.

4 Wr T 1

2 9

t o

872 4

3 5

t o

4 0 267600 267600

4 Tank 8

1 2

Wr T

Post

2 0

Junior School School House 26

RU SKIN AVE NUE 14

1 L 2

9 E 1

Slope W Y N A

A 1 W Slope 2 T

675 1 S 675

3 1 Slope Slope 7 Slope

1 Ruskin Infant School 1

Slope Slope 1

1 Slope 1

0 8

1 4 S C O T

3 T

0 6 PO 1 3 PE R

OAD 2 5

674 674 2

9 1

1 1 L

L o E t 8

4 W

1 N 9 A 6

1 t

o 2

88.1m 66 1

5 1

48 8

6 9 9 7

9 TCB 85.0m

1 46

0 1

5 6

82.9m 34

1 6 SHEL LEY ROAD

9 8

267300 8 83.9m 267300 2

487100 487300

9 BM 5 83 872

.34m

Scale 1:1250 5

9 7

1 8 7 66

The design of the building is considered to be acceptable in the surroundings.

The extension will be within the existing security fence and so is acceptable in terms of crime prevention.

One the plans, it is shown that 3 trees will be required to be felled in relation to these proposals. It is considered that these should be replaced elsewhere on the site.

Overall, the proposal is considered acceptable in relation to Policies G1 and L2 providing any trees that are lost are replaced and it being ensured that there is sufficient parking provision on the school site to accommodate any extra staff that work in the extension.

RECOMMENDATION: That the County Council be advised that no objections are raised to this proposal subject to any trees that are lost are replaced elsewhere within the grounds and it being ensured that there is sufficient parking provision on the school site to accommodate any extra staff that work in the extension.

67 BOROUGH COUNCIL OF WELLINGBOROUGH AGENDA ITEM

FOR INFORMATION

Regulatory Committee 12/10/2005

Report of the Director of Environment and Economy

APPLICATION REF: WP/2002/0266/C

PROPOSAL: Extraction of sand and gravel, the construction of two new highways access points, the importation of inert waste materials to assist in the progressive restoration of worked out areas and the importation of minerals via a new mineral field conveyor.

LOCATION: Earls Barton Quarry, Grendon Road, Earls Barton, Northampton.

APPLICANT: Hanson Quarry Products Europe Limited.

NOTE: Northamptonshire County Council have notified this Authority that this application has been withdrawn by Hanson Aggregates on 9th September 2005.

A plan with be available to view at the meeting.

BOROUGH COUNCIL OF WELLINGBOROUGH AGENDA ITEM

FOR INFORMATION

Regulatory Committee 12/10/2005

Report of the Director of Environment and Economy

APPLICATION REF: WP/2005/0001/C

PROPOSAL: Transportation and deposition of surplus soil from Victoria Business Park (North of A45) onto land south of A45 adjacent to Irchester turn for agricultural improvement purposes.

LOCATION: Land south of A45 adjacent to Irchester Turn, Higham Road, Irchester.

APPLICANT: Whitworth Holdings Limited.

NOTE: Approved by Northamptonshire County Council on 23rd March 2005 subject to the following condition/s:-

Commencement

1. The development shall be begun within 6 months of the date of this planning permission.

Scope of Planning Permission

2. The development hereby permitted relates to the amended proposal as detailed in the applicant’s agent’s letter dated the 23rd February 2005 and the accompanying report and plans from Land Associates Ltd and provides for the deposit and spreading of 20,000m3 of topsoil onto the land shown on the 1/2500 scale drawing no. 1279629 (revision E)

3. The topsoil shall be spread to an average depth of 300 mm over the sub-grade 3b land shown on the revised deposited plan and soil spreading and handling shall only take place during dry late spring and summer conditions and in accordance with the operational scheme set out in pages 8 and 9 of Land Research Associates Ltd report.

Access and Highway Safety

4. The point of access into the application site shall be widened and improved to heavy-duty standard to accept two way flows and to support the weight of the delivery vehicles expected. On completion of the operations the access shall be reinstated and replanted, as necessary, to field access standard.

69 5. No operational vehicles shall be permitted to use Chester Road/High Street or travel south towards Irchester beyond the entrance to the site.

*6. Working times shall be restricted to off-peak hours (i.e. 9.30 to 15.30).

*7. Suitable wheel wash facilities must be available at each site and used for every vehicle exiting the site.

*8. As part of the wheel cleaning operation, the developer should take measures to minimise the amount of water tracked onto the highway and prevent ice from forming on the highway as a result of this.

*9. A mechanical road sweeper must be provided at all times during the stated working hours to ensure that any mud tracked onto the highway is swept immediately.

*Conditions 6-9 above are imposed by Direction of the Highways Agency acting on the authority of the Secretary of State for Transport.

End Date

10. All implementation and spreading of soils shall cease on or before the 30th September 2005, and no operations shall be carried out on the site after that date other than those required for restoration and aftercare.

Reasons for Conditions and Relevant Development Plan Policies

1. Required to be imposed pursuant to Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.

2-3. To specify the area and scale of operations and to avoid doubt as to the scope of this planning permission. Northamptonshire County Structure Plan 1996-2016 (CSP) Policy W3.

4. In the interest of highway safety and visual amenity (CSP Policy W3).

5. In the interests of highway safety (CSP Policy W3).

6-9. To ensure that the A45 trunk road continues to serve its purpose as part of a national system of routes for through traffic in accordance with Section 10 (2) of the Highways Act 1980 by minimising disruption on the trunk road resulting from traffic entering and emerging from the application site and in the interests of road safety.

10. To ensure that the development is satisfactorily completed by the end of the period stated and to enable the Waste Planning Authority to review the position at that stage (CSP Policy W3).

Informatives

1. Please see attached letter from the Environment Agency.

70 2. The applicant is reminded to be aware of any Health and Safety requirements which may arise from working under or close to the overhead electricity line which crosses the site.

REASONS FOR APPROVAL

This application has been amended and considerably reduced in scale mainly as a result of representations from the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra). It now relates to the importation and spreading of 20,000 m3 of topsoil onto 4.41 ha of land for agricultural improvement purposes. Wellingborough Borough Council also raised concerns and questioned whether the surplus materials should be more appropriately directed to the restoration of nearby mineral or waste sites. However, there is little identified demand for restoration materials in the Wellingborough and Nene Valley area at the present time. Defra feel that the revised proposals satisfactorily address the points originally raised. The proposal accords with the Proximity Principle and satisfies much of the criteria of Policy 23 of the emerging Waste Local Plan, and having regard to current circumstances, it is considered to represent the Best Practicable Environment Option. Planning permission should be granted accordingly.

A plan with be available to view at the meeting.

BOROUGH COUNCIL OF WELLINGBOROUGH AGENDA ITEM

FOR INFORMATION

Regulatory Committee 12/10/2005

Report of the Director of Environment and Economy

APPLICATION REF: WP/2005/0432/C

PROPOSAL: Change of use from agricultural building and yard to building for sorting of waste and parking for lorries and skip bins.

LOCATION: Appleby Lodge Farm, Sywell Road, Wellingborough.

APPLICANT: Mr G W Mills.

NOTE: Approved by Northamptonshire County Council on 15th September 2005 subject to the following condition/s:-

Commencement

1. The development must be begun not later than the expiration of 5 years beginning with the date of this permission.

Scope of Planning Permission

2. The range of wastes that may be imported to, stored on, handled on and ultimately exported off site shall be confined to inert skip waste, timber and cardboard and no hazardous waste or food waste shall be stored or processed on site.

3. The development hereby permitted is restricted to that part of the former agricultural buildings and adjacent forecourt/yard area as outlined in red on the Location plan entitled Buildings at Appleby Lodge.

4. The use permitted shall be operated only by Ashby Skips Ltd.

Access and Highway Safety

5. The access shall be improved to provide radii of 11.5m on either side of the access with the adjacent public highway.

6. Visibility splays of 4.5 x 215m shall be provided in each direction. These dimensions are to be measured from, and along the nearer edge of the carriageway. Any features within the resultant splays shall not exceed 0.9metres above access or carriageway level. The hedgerows to the side of the access shall be trimmed back (not removed) and thereafter maintained for visibility purposes.

S YWE LL R OAD 114.9m

Appleby Lodge

The Bungalow

688 688

Mast

687 687

268600 268600

485500 856 485700 Scale 1:1250 72 Drainage

7. Any facilities, above ground, for the storage of oils, fuels or chemicals shall be sited on impervious bund walls. The volume of the bunded compound should be at least equivalent to the capacity of the tank plus 10%. All filling points, vents, gauges and sight glasses must be located within the bund. The drainage system if the bund shall be sealed with no discharge to any watercourse, land or underground strata. Associated pipe work should be located above ground and protected from accidental damage. All filling points and tank overflow pipe outlets should be detailed to discharge into the bund.

Vehicle Sheeting

8. All vehicles transporting waste materials in accordance with this development shall be adequately sheeted to prevent spillage of the materials.

Hours of Working

9. Except as may otherwise be agreed in writing by the Waste Planning Authority, no vehicles shall enter or leave the site and no working shall take place except between the hours of 7.30am and 6.00pm Monday to Fridays and 7.30am to 1pm on Saturdays with no such operations being carried out on the site on Sundays or Public Holidays.

Dust

10. Suitable measure, including the use of water spray facilities in periods of dry weather shall be adopted to ensure that dust is kept to a minimum on the site and access road.

Vehicle Routing

11. All skip lorries and other heavy commercial vehicles based at or visiting the site shall be routed to enter the site from the East and exit towards the Park Farm Industrial Estate.

Monitoring

12. The operators of the site will at a minimum of 12 monthly intervals provide in writing to, and upon request by, the Waste Planning Authority detailed information on the quantities and types of waste material brought onto the site for recovery, and sent for disposal.

13. A copy of the terms of this permission, including all documents hereby permitted and any documents subsequently approved in accordance with this permission (or amendments approved pursuant to this permission) shall be displayed at the site office and shall be made known to any person given responsibility for the management or control of operations on the site.

The reasons for the conditions and relevant Development Plan Policies:-

1. Required to be imposed pursuant to Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.

73 2, 3 & 4 To define the scope of the permission and in the interest of clarity.

5 & 6 In the interests of highway safety (Northamptonshire Waste Local Plan (Proposed Modifications) policy 8).

7. To prevent pollution of the Water Environment (County Structure Plan, Policy AR9).

8. To safeguard the interests of users of the public highway (Northamptonshire Local Plan (Proposed Modifications) policy 8).

9. To ensure that working on the site is carried out within reasonable hours so as to avoid disturbance.

10. To safeguard the interest of users of the public highway (Northamptonshire Local Plan (Proposed Modifications) Policy 8).

11. In the interest of highway safety (Northamptonshire Waste Local Plan (Proposed Modifications) Policy 8).

12 & 13. To monitor the implementation of the conditions (County Structure Plan, Policy W3).

Informatives

1. The Environment Agency state that the proposed development would require a Waste Management licence. 2. The applicant’s attention is drawn to a letter from the Environment Agency dated 18th July 2005. 3. The information required under condition 12 will only be used in aggregated format as part of an Annual Monitoring report produced by the Waste Planning Authority. All such information will be treated on a confidential basis.

REASONS FOR APPROVAL

The development is considered to be acceptable in accordance with Policy W3 of the Northamptonshire County Structure Plan 1996-2016 and policies 1, 4 and 8 of the Northamptonshire Waste Local Plan (Proposed Modifications) Jan 2005.

The proposed development is considered acceptable and will not adversely impact upon the surrounding area and there are no significant environmental, amenity or highway safety issues which would justify the refusal of the application.

74 BOROUGH COUNCIL OF WELLINGBOROUGH AGENDA ITEM

Regulatory Committee 12/10/2005

Report of the Director of Environment and Economy

APPLICATION REF: WP/2005/0443/C

PROPOSAL: Importation and deposition of inert materials with restoration to improved wetland.

LOCATION: Earls Barton Quarry, Grendon Road, Earls Barton.

APPLICANT: Hanson Quarry Products Europe Limited.

NOTE: Northamptonshire County Council have notified this Authority that this application has been withdrawn by Hanson Quarry Products Europe Limited on 28th September 2005.

M Slope Sub Sta

D CLAR r E CLO a SE in M IL L L A N E

(T ra c B k A ) L M

O R

X A

F L

O C

R L

D O

S C E L 4738 U O 71.0m S

E U

Pond Water

Slope k c ra T

Water

k c ra D T ra in

58.8m

0023

Slope V 0023 V

D Slope

Pumping Slope D Station Slope D Slope Slope 486000 487000 V Slope V

Water Issues

Borough Council Of Wellingborough:by Licence No.100018694. Published 07/07/2005 y- La 45.4m

48.5m

Slope U U 5 V 0003 4 8500 A Slope Slope

8500 0003 P

4200 5 0006 0003 4 Y A M

il 263000 l 263000 D L a Sinks n 0049

D e V Water

Water

Water Y BM 46.33m Y Mill House Water e

Water e Water N

WWater r Slope Y Water e iv

R Slope 1788 46.0m Slope

P 6886

Y Y

D5 4 A

7683 P 45 A U Water

Water

BM 46.78m

ck ra T Sl Water Water Mooring Posts WaterW 0077 Slope Lock r Slope yo ve on C

e en D N

er iv R Weir U

D Water

Concrete Recycling Centre Drain

0066

E T D 0066 L ra Slope 5862 in

e Water

n e

2858

r P Slope Y

Pond e

7757 v

Water i Water R

Water T L P

Water

0053

Water Water

Ponds Water P P

in ra D Water U Water

0038 KD P Water D U 8934 Water A Water

k Trac

6831 0828

Slope Water r o k ey c Fairacre v ra on T C

4 7 Club D 5025 .5 m

Slope D Slope D

Drain Water Sports Ground P P P Water Water

Tennis k Court Trac Water U Drain 0016 D D D r P a in in ra D D Water Pond Water P Water 0013 k Water c a r T

k P ac Tr

D r D a D PD i n Water

9500 Tra ck Water Water

P K Water Water P 0007 P B Y U

FD48.8m K Ps M Water D Water

r W Pump House a Water R iv Track in Water W er D N Water D e ck ne in D Water Lo Dra ra 8m in 47.9 Water Y M Water T th B P P a Water r P a c WaterWater g rain D k D 2803 ra Water BM 47.83m in Water Weir 8502 P n Di in Water Works ra P a r D Sluice Water D ain Water D r P 0005 2700 6900 0002 D Water ck 4800 8400 Water 47.5m Nc_scTra Water Water Water Water Conveyors Water PWater T Water D r

c Water

k in D P 620 r 620 ra a

D i

Water n Water P E Water T

rs D L yo ra ve r Wateri Water on o n Water

C C ey El on v U Water ve on D y C Sub Sta or Water Water Nc_sc P

Y ck ra

T in Pond ra W Nc_sc D Water Conveyors Water k Water Water ac Water Tr Water

e n n ai Water e Dr N BM 48.00m Works r Water e OAD iv ION R P R TAT 47.5m S

D r a in Water n Drai D

r a i n Water

ain

V U Water P Water

Water

Water Water The Stables Nc_sc

Water The Sidings V P The Gatehouse

BM 47.83m Eden House W47.5m

T U L Y U

i Water U n Water ETL

Water L T E

U Water D M r U S a in U Water Water Water

Water Water U ETL Water U Sheep D U Slope Dip Y U Track

Slope

47.9m Slope Pastures Farm D

r a

c k SlopeU

L Twrs Gantry

D V

r V a V in

L Twr L Twr D L Twr

ter V

V Std G U a

T t r

V r y a

c k

V V P

U Std

V L Twrs L Twr V 49.7m V Electricity V 50.0m Y L Twr Sub Station Slope 47.2m V 1033

V V D

D Guide Post

V V Std

P The Station Lodge

W V V D BM 51.50m Porters Lodge Electricity L Twrs Gantry L Twr V Sub Station L Twr U D V Std VDV P L Twr V 3125 U D D Slope D P 49.7m Std P L Twr D Gantry D E L Twr T Cn_sc P L

Std T U

r Slope a

c k D Slope Slope Slope

in D P 6600 Dra D Slope D Slope

D D ra in D DPP

Issues Nc_sc D Slope Slope D 0006 Nc_sc

D Nc_sc U Slope 1700 0003 6700D 0006 2600 P Slope D 8000 261000 Nc_sc 261000 Nc_sc PDP Water Pond 2096 D48.5m D D r 486000 PD ain 487000 rain P D Pond Water D P D DP DP Scale 1:10000 N D PPD53.6m

D DP D Y D

D6366 P WP/2005/0443/C D U

Pond D Water

1458 Water

8654

Nc_sc

in ra D N P 50.9m FB 75 12th October 2005

REGULATORY COMMITTEE

The following applications dealt with under the terms of the Director of Environment and Economy’s delegated powers.

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

WP/2002/0630/O Knapp Toolmaking Limited Land adj. Knapp Toolmaking, APPROVEC London Road, Wellingborough. Proposed new health club (outline application).

WP/2002/0665/F Prologis Developments Land between Victoria Mills APPROVEC Limited and Chester Farm, A45, Wellingborough. Means of access and internal spine road together with site engineering earthworks and drainage details.

WP/2005/0325/CON Mr D Mallard Land adj. 15 Rock Road, APPROVED Finedon, Wellingborough. Details submitted pursuant to Condition 2 concerning a scheme for fencing and retaining walls around the boundaries around the site for erection of two semi-detached dwelling houses at land adj 15 Rock Road, Finedon. Reference no. WP/2004/0603/F approved 10/11/2004.

WP/2005/0400/LB Mr J Burditt 2 Sywell Village, Sywell. APPROVEC Conversion of existing outbuilding (currently used as utility/store) to living area and wc with rear single storey extension and corridor link to existing main dwelling

WP/2005/0418/F Nigel Brown Land at Manor House Farm, APPROVEC Green Lane entrance, Isham. Farm workers bungalow.

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

WP/2005/0427/F Airwave MMO2 Limited Newlands Farm, Hardwick APPROVED Lane, Hannington. Retention of a telecommunications base station in the form of a 18m high lattice tower with 3 no. airwave antennae, 2 no. airwave 600mm transmission dishes, 1 no. GPS, a ground based equipment cabin together with ancillary development thereto.

WP/2005/0439/ECON Central Networks East Sywell Road, Wellingborough. AGREED To erect the proposed 11,000 volt overhead line on wooden poles with a tolerance of 30 metres either side of the route shown on plan number BK67632/CN Ref:130013614, in the parish of Wellingborough.

WP/2005/0441/F Mr Stuart Howarth Ciel 12 Arndale House, Sheep APPROVEC Properties Limited Street, Wellingborough. General external refurbishment of existing 1970's office and ground floor retail unit. To provide a new 2 storey entrance in conjunction with part re- cladding and rendering of the existing entrance and stair core. Existing windows to be replaced with new windows systems in conjunction with new brise soliel. Existing wall to Sheep Street elevation (at 4th, 5th and 6th floors) to be finished with sto render.

WP/2005/0466/F Mr N Burditt 2 Sywell Village, Sywell. APPROVEC Single storey extensions with conversion of existing outbuilding (currently used as utility/store) to living area and WC.

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

WP/2005/0467/F Wellingborough School Wellingborough School, APPROVEC Irthlingborough Road, Wellingborough. Proposed internal alterations and extensions to Weymouth House.

WP/2005/0469/F Mr and Mrs C O'Neill 89 Gipsy Lane, Irchester. APPROVEC Second vehicular access.

WP/2005/0470/F Miss S Parish 5 Derwent Close, APPROVEC Wellingborough. Two storey side extension.

WP/2005/0471/TC Hutchison 3G (UK) Telephone Mast, Wilby Way, APPROVEC Great Doddington. The installation of a radio base station consisting of a 15m high telecommunications tower, three antennas, one 600mm and two 300mm diameter dish antennas, radio equipment housing and development ancillary thereto - amended plan.

WP/2005/0476/F Mr and Mrs Heath 62 Station Road, Irchester, APPROVEC Wellingborough. Proposed two storey side extension - amended plans.

WP/2005/0480/F Ms L Jackson 105 Eastfield Road, APPROVEC Wellingborough. Attic conversion including dormer window to side, single storey rear extension and rebuild existing conservatory.

WP/2005/0482/F Mr D Steers 22 Park Street, Wollaston. APPROVEC Double garage with a first floor extension to side of property.

WP/2005/0489/F J Hampshire 7 Thrapston Road, Finedon. APPROVEC Vehicular access.

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

WP/2005/0490/F Mrs E Bradley, Land between 12 and 18 APPROVEC East Midlands Housing Duke Street, Wellingborough. Association Construction of a pair of semi-detached houses two storey high on a vacant plot. Planning approval was granted 25 May 2005 application number WP/2004/0881/F. We subsequently discovered a computer error resulting in an inaccurate plot; not to scale. The purpose of this application is to submit the true to scale representation of the proposed development.

WP/2005/0493/AV Tesco Stores Limited Tesco Stores Limited, Victoria APPROVEC Park, Turnells Mill Lane, Wellingborough. Proposed alterations to the building signage on the existing store.

WP/2005/0494/AV Tesco Stores Limited Tesco Stores Limited, Victoria APPROVEC Park, Turnells Mill Lane, Wellingborough. Various items of proposed site signage.

WP/2005/0495/AV Tesco Stores Limited Tesco Stores Limited, Victoria APPROVEC Park, Turnells Mill Lane, Wellingborough. Rebranding of an existing electrical store.

WP/2005/0496/AV Tesco Stores Limited Tesco Stores Limited, Victoria APPROVEC Park, Turnells Mill Lane, Wellingborough. Rebranding of the existing petrol filling station canopy.

WP/2005/0497/AV Tesco Stores Limited Tesco Stores Limited, Victoria APPROVEC Park, Turnells Mill Lane, Wellingborough. Proposed development board signage.

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

WP/2005/0500/F Toby Higgins 191 Hinwick Road, Wollaston. APPROVEC Two storey + single storey rear extension (including balcony).

WP/2005/0502/F M Kansagra 17-19 Station Road, Earls APPROVEC Barton. Conversion of 1 no. flat into 2 smaller flats.

WP/2005/0504/F Mr and Mrs M Monfared 23 Fairfield Road, Isham, APPROVEC Kettering. New bay window to front elevation at ground floor.

WP/2005/0505/F Mr and Mrs D Hatchwell 71 Medway Drive, APPROVEC Wellingborough. Conservatory at rear.

WP/2005/0508/F Mr Khakar 22 Alexandra Road, APPROVEC Wellingborough. Extension to rear first floor.

WP/2005/0510/CON Automation Control 25 Talbot Road, APPROVED Wellingborough. Details submitted pursuant to Conditions 3 and 8 concerning a comprehensive scheme for landscaping and noise assessment of road and railway sources for demolition of industrial unit and erection of 9 no. 3 storey town houses at Signal Works, 25 Talbot Road, Wellingborough. Reference no. WP/2004/0801/RM approved 21/12/04.

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

WP/2005/0512/CON Automation Control Land adjacent 31 Compton APPROVEC Road, Wellingborough. Details submitted pursuant to Condition 4 concerning external facing and roofing materials for proposed development comprising 2 no. town houses and 1 no. apartment to be located above triple car port at adjacent 31 Compton Road, Wellingborough. Reference no. WP/2003/0731/F approved 24 March 2004.

WP/2005/0516/F Mr and Mrs Proctor 53 Gisburne Road, APPROVEC Wellingborough. 2 storey rear extension.

WP/2005/0517/O Angela Whittam Land adjacent 39 Brickhill APPROVEC Road, Wellingborough. Renewal of outline planning permission WP/2002/0408/O for new 2 storey house.

WP/2005/0520/F Mrs J S Bailey 9 Easton Way, Grendon. APPROVEC Renewal of planning permission WP/2000/0356/F for extension to dwelling house.

WP/2005/0522/F Alec Duncan, BT Payphones Telephone Kiosk, Cannon APPROVED Street, Wellingborough. Retention of existing telephone kiosk and change of use to form ATM and payphone.

WP/2005/0523/F Mr and Mrs F Westwray 7 Fir Tree Grove, Bozeat. APPROVEC Single storey side extension.

WP/2005/0524/F Mr Robin Tucker 13 Troon Crescent, APPROVEC Wellingborough. Two storey side extension, double garage to front, single storey extension and conservatory to rear - amended plans.

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

WP/2005/0525/F K Patel 1 Covington Grove, APPROVEC Wellingborough. First floor extension to side and two storey extension to rear.

WP/2005/0526/F Mr David Hirst - Company Wellingborough Golf Club, APPROVEC Sec Wellingborough Golf The Slips, Great Harrowden. Club Company Limited Hardstanding area and storage of materials facilities.

WP/2005/0532/F Club Secretary, Eileen Grendon Sapphires, Yardley APPROVEC Wilmin, Grendon Sapphires Road, Grendon. Youth Football Club Erection of a sports pavilion (slightly reduced scheme to be completed in two phases).

WP/2005/0533/AV Alderforce Limited 40 Cambridge Street, APPROVEC Wellingborough. New illuminated fascia and projecting signs to replace existing.

WP/2005/0534/F Alderforce Limited 40 Cambridge Street, APPROVEC Wellingborough. New shopfront.

WP/2005/0537/F Mr and Mrs R Stephenson 6 Gipsy Lane, Irchester. APPROVEC Single and two storey extensions to side and rear.

WP/2005/0538/F Mr N J Wookey 29 Manor Road, Mears APPROVEC Ashby. RENEWAL of planning permission WP/2000/0056/F for extensions to form new bedroom with bay extension to existing bedroom.

WP/2005/0540/F Richard Walmsley 53 Churchill Road, Earls APPROVEC Barton. First floor extension.

WP/2005/0542/F Mr N Lewis 6 Woodlands Grange, APPROVEC Doddington Road, Earls Barton. Addition of new ground floor sitting room.

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

WP/2005/0544/F Mr A Kirk 45 Sunnyside, Earls Barton. APPROVEC Two storey front extension - amended plan.

WP/2005/0545/F Mr Garner 12 Malham Court, APPROVEC Wellingborough. Proposed single-storey rear extension and conservatory.

WP/2005/0547/AV J D Wetherspoon Plc The Redwell, 16 Silver Street, APPROVEC Wellingborough. Replacement of existing fascia signage with new fascia signage - including static, external sign lights as existing.

WP/2005/0549/F Mr A and Mrs M Roper Land adjacent to 39 Roberts APPROVEC Street, Wellingborough. Construction of a single dwelling with 4 bedrooms, double garage, study and a swimming pool (as previous approval WP/2005/0100/F but with the addition of a swimming pool).

WP/2005/0554/F Mr Mark Henderson All Hallows Vicarage, Church APPROVEC Street, Wellingborough. New build two storey apartments to form 8 no. dwellings.

WP/2005/0556/AV Hardy's and Hanson Ock 'n' Dough, 18-20 Farm APPROVEC Road, Wellingborough. New brewery signage.

WP/2005/0557/F Mr and Mrs Glastonbury 3 Prospect Avenue, Irchester. APPROVED Victorian style conservatory to rear elevation.

WP/2005/0561/F Mr A Crook 8 Sywell Avenue, APPROVEC Wellingborough. Kitchen extension at rear of dwelling.

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

WP/2005/0568/CON Tesco Stores Limited Tesco Stores Limited, Victoria APPROVED Park, Turnells Mill Lane, Wellingborough. Details submitted pursuant to Condition 6 concerning a scheme for aesthetic improvement of the north west part of the site for extension to foodstore and ancillary works at Tesco Stores Limited, Victoria Park, Turnells Mill Lane, Wellingborough. Reference WP/2003/0312/F approved 28 April 2004.

WP/2005/0572/F Mr and Mrs P Davis 46 Muirfield Road, APPROVEC Wellingborough. Two storey extension to side of house.

WP/2005/0573/F Mr A Blake 6 Prospect Close, Wollaston. APPROVEC Proposed extra garage to side of existing.

WP/2005/0576/F Ms G Vaughan 23 Furnace Lane, Little APPROVEC Harrowden. Porch extension to front.

WP/2005/0579/ECON Central Networks East Finedon Station Road Isham APPROVED Erect two terminal poles, plus intermediate pole with air brake switch. The erection of the air brake switch will enable Central Networks to maintain supplies when carrying out routine maintenance, or in emergency conditions. Two terminal poles will also have to be erected, one for connection with the existing 33,000 kilo volt overhead line and the other to be connected to the 33,000 kilo volt underground cable to Burton Wold wind farm.

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

WP/2005/0580/F Mr and Mrs A Tonks 150 Chatsworth Drive, APPROVEC Wellingborough. Two storey side extension to existing house.

WP/2005/0590/CON Mr and Mrs J W Pitts Land off Glebe Road, Mears APPROVED Ashby. Details submitted pursuant to condition 10 concerning a comprehensive landscape scheme for Dairy youngstock unit with associated buildings and dwelling house (slightly amended position and design) at land off Glebe Road Mears Ashby Northampton. Reference no. WP/2005/0434/F approved 26 July 2005.

WP/2005/0591/CON Augusta Developments The Castle Club, 33 St Johns APPROVED Street, Wellingborough. Details submitted pursuant to Condition 4 concerning external facing and roofing materials for erection of 10 no. flats at The Castle Club, 33 St Johns Street, Wellingborough. Reference WP/2005/0300/F approved 23 June 2005.

WP/2005/0600/CON Augusta Developments The Castle Club, 33 St Johns APPROVED Street, Wellingborough. Details submitted pursuant to Condition 6 concerning landscaping scheme and planting schedule for erection of 10 no. flats at The Castle Club, 33 St Johns Street, Wellingborough. Reference WP/2005/0300/F approved 23 June 2005.

WP/2005/0602/F Mr and Mrs M O'Keffee 5 Fowey Close, APPROVEC Wellingborough. Two storey extension to side of existing building and conservatory to rear.

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

WP/2005/0605/CON C Leake Land off Austin Close, APPROVED Irchester. Details submitted pursuant to Condition 2 regarding colour finish of the fence for erection of 2.4 metre high security fence and gates at land off Austin Close, Irchester. Reference no. WP/2002/0684/F approved 2 January 2003.

WP/2005/0606/CON C Leake Land off Austin Close, APPROVED Irchester. Details submitted pursuant to Condition 3 regarding the actual position of the fence for erection of 2.4 metre high security fence and gates at land off Austin Close, Irchester. Reference no. WP/2002/0684/F approved 2 January 2003.

WP/2005/0607/CON Francis Jackson Estates Pear Tree Farm, 55 Main APPROVED Limited Street, Little Harrowden. Details submitted pursuant to Condition 2 concerning external facing and roofing materials for Construction of nine dwellings including two conversions at Pear Tree Farm, 55 Main Street, Little Harrowden. Reference WP/2005/0314/F approved 21 June 2005.

WP/2005/0637/CON Bassetform Limited Land adjoining 16 Poplar APPROVED Street, Wellingborough. Details submitted pursuant to Condition 1 concerning representative samples of all external facing and roofing materials for construction of a two storey dwelling at land adjoining 16 Poplar Street, Wellingborough. Reference no. WP/2005/0433/RM approved 02 August 2005.

86 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, Environment and Economy Department, Croyland Abbey, Tithe Barn Road, Wellingborough.

87 REGULATORY COMMITTEE

APPLICATIONS DEALT WITH WITH UNDER THE BUILDING REGULATIONS APPLICATION DECISIONS BOROUGH OF WELLINGBOROUGH Date :26/09/2005

Description Application No. Name & Address FP/2005/0976/ B Mr&Mrs John Hughes 21 Loft conversion with access via a Fairfield Road Isham stair tower APPROVED Kettering

FP/2005/1040/ B Mr&Mrs A Hilton 3 The Two storey front extension Sorrels Isham Kettering APPROVED

FP/2005/1042/ A Mr Kevin And Mrs Tanya E Kitchen extension and conservatory PepperAshridge House 4 (single storey) APPROVED Dybdale Crescent Wellingborough

FP/2005/1165/ Mr Mark and Mrs Julia Proposed domestic garage addition Whatling19 Hilltop Road Little to detached property APPROVED C Harrowden Wellingborough

FP/2005/1315/ Mr R Metha 15 LISTER Single storey rear extension ROAD WELLINGBOROUGH APPROVED

FP/2005/1395/ A The Tower Property Erection of 18 apartments Group4 Holm Close Weedon APPROVED C 88 REGULATORY COMMITTEE

APPLICATIONS DEALT WITH WITH UNDER THE BUILDING REGULATIONS APPLICATION DECISIONS BOROUGH OF WELLINGBOROUGH Date :26/09/2005

Description Application No. Name & Address FP/2005/1402/ A H Taylor 1 Lyle Court Ground floor shop only to 2 no flats Wellingborough and A3 use. APPROVED C

FP/2005/1670/ Miss S Parish 5 DERWENT Two storey side extension CLOSE REJECTED WELLINGBOROUGH

FP/2005/1874/ Mr & Mrs P Morson 92 MAIN First floor rear extension STREET LITTLE APPROVED HARROWDEN WELLINGBOROUGH

FP/2005/1875/ Mr & Mrs S Kirby 72 PARK New roof to existing kitchen and ROAD WELLINGBOROUGH dining room. Refurbishment of APPROVED kitchen and dining room.

FP/2005/2096/ Mr D Moore 5 UNITY CLOSE Single storey rear playroom WOLLASTON extension and replacement of flat APPROVED WELLINGBOROUGH roof with pitched & shower

FP/2005/2102/ Mr & Mrs Ashley 26 Single storey rear extension & HILLSIDE ROAD conservatory. APPROVED WELLINGBOROUGH 89 REGULATORY COMMITTEE

APPLICATIONS DEALT WITH WITH UNDER THE BUILDING REGULATIONS APPLICATION DECISIONS BOROUGH OF WELLINGBOROUGH Date :26/09/2005

Description Application No. Name & Address FP/2005/2220/ Basset Form Limited2 Construction of single, two storey, Brickhill Road Wellingborough dwelling APPROVED C Northants

FP/2005/2251/ Manor Park Homes Factory extension LtdFinedon Sidings Industrial APPROVED C Estate Furnace Lane Finedon

WI/2005/2261/ Paul Fraser Gytringham Replacement window and doors Installations45 Crafton ACCEPTED Underwood Kettering

DI/2005/2262/ Miss Price 6 HENSHAW Disabled grant works ROAD WELLINGBOROUGH ACCEPTED

BN/2005/2343/ Allison Hunt-Murphy 32 Internal alterations to kitchen and TORRINGTON ROAD utility room. ACCEPTED WELLINGBOROUGH

PS/2005/2380/ Northampton Borough Internal refurbishment and disabled CouncilBuilding Control w/c APPROVED C Division Cliftonville House, Bedford Road Northampton 90 REGULATORY COMMITTEE

APPLICATIONS DEALT WITH WITH UNDER THE BUILDING REGULATIONS APPLICATION DECISIONS BOROUGH OF WELLINGBOROUGH Date :26/09/2005

Description Application No. Name & Address PS/2005/2381/ East Northamptonshire Internal refurbishments - disabled District CouncilEast w/c APPROVED C Northamptonshire House Cedar Drive Thrapston

PS/2005/2414/ South Northamptonshire Internal refurbishment and disabled CouncilBuilding Control w/c APPROVED C Springfields Towcester

BN/2005/2428/ Terry Tuthill 93 RIDGEWAY Single storey extension WELLINGBOROUGH ACCEPTED

FP/2005/2430/ Wayland Timber Products Proposed portal framed open sided LtdWAYLAND TIMBER building for timber storage APPROVED C CARROL SPRING FARM SIDEGATE LANE FINEDON WELLINGBOROUGH

BN/2005/2433/ Mr John Mclean 53 ST Removal of chimney breast, refit BARNABAS STREET bathroom, create slap floor in ACCEPTED WELLINGBOROUGH kitchen for french doors

FP/2005/2435/ Ms M Cadman 67 Adaptation field kitchen to a GRENDON HALL MAIN disabled WC and shower room APPROVED ROAD GRENDON WELLINGBOROUGH 91 REGULATORY COMMITTEE

APPLICATIONS DEALT WITH WITH UNDER THE BUILDING REGULATIONS APPLICATION DECISIONS BOROUGH OF WELLINGBOROUGH Date :26/09/2005

Description Application No. Name & Address BN/2005/2436/ Boniface53 WOODLANDS Widening of arch between kitchen ROAD IRCHESTER and diner ACCEPTED WELLINGBOROUGH

WI/2005/2450/ Mr Surendra Patel 6 NORTH Replacing new windows & door ROAD EARLS BARTON ACCEPTED WELLINGBOROUGH

BN/2005/2490/ Beryl And George112 Internal alterations ( 3 Lintels) SHELLEY ROAD ACCEPTED WELLINGBOROUGH

BN/2005/2492/ Mr & Mrs J Ross The Old Remove low bearing wall and Bake House24 MAIN ROAD support over ACCEPTED GRENDON WELLINGBOROUGH

DI/2005/2493/ M & J Stilp LtdYork Farm Disabled adaption Walting Street Towcester ACCEPTED

DI/2005/2494/ Borough Council Of New shower room WellingboroughSwanspool ACCEPTED House Wellingborough 92 REGULATORY COMMITTEE

APPLICATIONS DEALT WITH WITH UNDER THE BUILDING REGULATIONS APPLICATION DECISIONS BOROUGH OF WELLINGBOROUGH Date :26/09/2005

Description Application No. Name & Address DI/2005/2495/ Borough Council Of New shower room WellingboroughSwanspool ACCEPTED House Wellingborough

DI/2005/2504/ Borough Council Of New shower room WellingboroughSwanspool ACCEPTED House Wellingborough

DI/2005/2505/ Borough Council Of New shower room WellingboroughSwanspool ACCEPTED House Wellingborough

DI/2005/2506/ Borough Council Of New shower room WellingboroughSwanspool ACCEPTED House Wellingborough

DI/2005/2508/ Mrs W Newton 9 MILLERS New shower room PARK WELLINGBOROUGH ACCEPTED

DI/2005/2509/ Borough Council Of New shower room WellingboroughSwanspool ACCEPTED House Wellingborough 93 REGULATORY COMMITTEE

APPLICATIONS DEALT WITH WITH UNDER THE BUILDING REGULATIONS APPLICATION DECISIONS BOROUGH OF WELLINGBOROUGH Date :26/09/2005

Description Application No. Name & Address DI/2005/2510/ M J Stilp LtdYork Farm Level access shower room Walking Street Towcester ACCEPTED

BN/2005/2511/ Mr Ben Leeson 8 GIPSY Garage and store area LANE IRCHESTER ACCEPTED WELLINGBOROUGH

DI/2005/2514/ Borough Council Of New Shower Room WellingboroughSwanspool ACCEPTED House Wellingborough

FP/2005/2516/ Northamptonshire County Installation of mobile classroom CouncilChildren & Young APPROVED People Service, Buildings&Capital Department PO Box 216, John Dryden House 8-10 The Lakes

DI/2005/2517/ Mrs Townsend 59 CROMER Bathroom adaption to provide level ROAD FINEDON access shower ACCEPTED WELLINGBOROUGH

DI/2005/2518/ Mrs B Watson 50 ATTLEY Bathroom adaption to provide level COURT access shower facility ACCEPTED WELLINGBOROUGH 94 REGULATORY COMMITTEE

APPLICATIONS DEALT WITH WITH UNDER THE BUILDING REGULATIONS APPLICATION DECISIONS BOROUGH OF WELLINGBOROUGH Date :26/09/2005

Description Application No. Name & Address DI/2005/2522/ Mr K Driver 23 HOOKHAMS Single shower room conversion & PATH WOLLASTON house modifications door ACCEPTED WELLINGBOROUGH alterations

FP/2005/2540/ Mr D Mallard 31 The New detached bungalow Gatehouse West Street Earls APPROVED C Barton

DI/2005/2542/ Mrs Townsend 59 CROMER Bathroom adaption to provide level ROAD FINEDON access shower ACCEPTED WELLINGBOROUGH

BN/2005/2564/ Mrs C Murdin 57 NORTH Conversion of cellar to habitable STREET space ACCEPTED WELLINGBOROUGH BOROUGH COUNCIL OF WELLINGBOROUGH AGENDA ITEM

Regulatory Committee 12 October 2005

Report of the Regulatory Services Manager

DEVELOPMENT CONTROL PERFORMANCE REPORT Year 2005

1. Purpose of Report

1.1 To advise Members on the Council’s Development Control Performance of the impact of changes outlined in the service plan,

2. Background

2.1 This report reviews the Development Control performance within the last financial year 1 April 2004 to 31 March 2005.

3. Discussion

3.1 This report seeks to inform Members of performance within the last financial year, 2004 to 2005, and identify areas where further improvement and changes may be sought. The key areas on which this report concentrates are the provision of details of the Development Control Service’s performance in relation to speed of determination of planning applications, and to advise how the following areas have changed or progressed:

• Performance • delegation and • change management initiatives.

3.2 The Service is also seeking improvements to IT, and further development of its existing systems. Both the Development Control and Spatial Planning services are currently developing the Council’s links to the Planning Portal, accessible on a national basis, and the Community Portal, that will be provided on a County basis.

A. Performance Management and Identification of Problem Areas

3.3 Best Value Performance Indicator

3.4 The BV targets for the three types of applications set by the ODPM are as follow:

• Major applications: 60 % within 13 weeks • Minor applications: 65% within 8 weeks

1 • Other applications: 80% within 8 weeks

3.6 Much effort is being carried out in respect of the other key areas which were identified for change, and have been restructured to provide benefits, including greater priority to focus separately on major applications, enforcement matters and on performance management, monitoring and improvement.

3.7 Table 1 at Appendix 1 shows the percentage of major, minor and other applications decided and speed of decision in the last 2 years, to quarter ending March 2005. Table 3 at Appendix 2 shows the total number of applications decided and the percentage of decisions delegated within 8 weeks in the 3 years ending March 2005.

3.8 Table 1 shows that in the year April 2004 to March 2005, 78% of major applications were decided within the statutory 13 week period; 75% of minor applications were decided within the statutory 8 week period, and 90% of other applications were decided within the statutory 8 week period. In the case of major and minor applications, there is significant improvement in performance compared with a year ago. 45 percentage points higher in major applications and 18 percentage points higher in minor applications than in 2003/04. There is also an improvement in determining other applications compared with a year ago.

3.9 The government BV targets for all three types: major, minor and other applications were met for that period. The actual results exceeded the respective targets of 60% within 13 weeks, 65% and 80% to be determined within 8 weeks. There is an overall significant improvement in planning applications determined in the last financial year 2004/05.

3.10 There have been a continuing number of staff changes in the Development Control Service. There is a national shortage of qualified planners and competitive recruitment practices across the county have led to personnel changes but without significant external recruitment. During the periods of vacancy, external agency workers have been appointed to deal with the volume of work. The work volumes are high but the supply of agency workers is severely low and at significant cost.

3.11 The fact that the performance figures for the Service in terms of speed of determination of applications has remained high has largely been due to the concentration of staff on the assessment of applications with the resultant lower attention on other matters. The increase in speed of determination of applications is set against a continual increase, in the number of planning applications being received. It is not considered, though, that the ability to work under such pressure will be sustainable in the long term and new ways of providing the service will need to be considered.

2 3.12 Applications within 8 weeks

3.13 The ODPM publishes national statistics showing how planning authorities have performed in relation to dealing with planning applications within 8 weeks. The Council’s performance in respect of the speed with which it processes applications within 8 weeks is shown in Table 3. In the period April 2004 to March 2005, it has dealt with 84% of applications within 8 weeks, as shown in Table 3. The speed of dealing with applications within 8 weeks for the calendar year January to December 2004 at 81% was the second highest performance within the County for that year (Table 4), East Northamptonshire being the highest at 82%. This compares with the national statistic of 77% of all planning decisions made within an 8 week period in 2004/05.

B. Delegated Authority

3.14 The ODPM has set a standard of 90% of planning decisions to be delegated to officers. The percentage of decisions delegated to officers for the period January 2004 to December 2004, shown in Table 4 at Appendix 2, is 91% of decisions in relation to planning applications made by officers in Wellingborough. This compares with 89% at South Northamptonshire, 86% at Daventry and 85% for both Northampton and East Northamptonshire.

C. Appeals

3.15 The Best Value Performance Indicators 2004/05 has introduced a new Performance Indicator (Appeals Performance). The criteria of assessing this performance indicator are based on the number of planning appeals being allowed by the planning inspectorate, against the number of planning applications originally refused by the local authorities. Wellingborough incurred over 40% of applications being allowed on appeal in the period April 2004 to March 2005, this was higher than the national average of appeals being allowed by the planning inspectorate.

D. DC Performance Management Project

3.16 In order to investigate possible new ways of working, a DC change management project has been initiated by using part of the Planning Delivery Grant (PDG) for this year. The project investigates possibilities of increasing the efficiency and effectiveness of the process and performance of the DC service. The project is currently being carried for this financial year 2005/06; findings will be reported to Committee in due course.

3.17 Improvement and Development of Liaison both with the Council and with external users

3.18 The service plan pointed to the need to obtain an awareness of customer opinion to inform future service provision. This has been obtained in part

3 through a recently carried out customer satisfaction survey. The result indicated approximately 76% of responses were satisfied with the service provided.

E. Information & Guidance

3.23 The service plan also pointed to a need for more information to be made available to applicants.

3.24 A number of guidance notes have been produced and a Code of Conduct for Planning has been adopted. In addition, the Development Control Service has developed this area, in particular the formalisation of internal procedures for planning applications, appeals and enforcement.

F. E-Planning and Quality

3.25 The new Best Value Performance Indicator 2004/05 for Quality Checklist has included the capability for an electronic planning service.

3.26 This criteria refers to a planning website survey assessment of the availability and accessibility of online planning information and services on local authorities’ websites. The survey has been commissioned by the ODPM to assist in the monitoring of e-planning progress and the distribution of Planning Delivery Grant funding.

3.27 The scope of the survey criteria includes the development control process, development plans and policy, but does not include the enforcement process. The assessment is aimed at the needs of both regular and potential one-off users of council planning services.

3.28 Authorities have been tested against a set of 21 ‘Pendleton’ criteria, designed to test the availability and accessibility of on-line services from the point of view of the web-user. For this survey the ‘Pendleton Criteria’ have been applied to local authorities at a district level. The 21 criteria include accessibility of planning website, online application register, viewable Council Committee agenda and meetings, online application submission and details of planning policies.

3.29 A score has been given to each local authority based on how many criteria were met. Points were only awarded where the online services required to meet the criterion were considered accessible to the user, were up-to-date and functioning.

3.30 Out of the seven Northamptonshire Borough Councils, Wellingborough scored 19, Kettering scored 16, East Northamptonshire scored 15 and Northampton scored 14 out of 21 ‘Pendleton’ survey points. Scoring 19 points, Wellingborough is placed in the top quartile of local authorities. Detail of the Pendleton Criteria Results is at Appendix 1.

3.31 Summary

3.32 The service is experiencing an increasingly high volume of intake of applications during a period of low staff resource. The significant increase in planning applications includes the WEAST planning applications. Many planning authorities are finding it difficult to recruit new staff from a smaller pool of qualified professionals.

3.33 The DC Performance change management project is designed to investigate possibilities of increasing the efficiency and effectiveness of the process and performance of the DC service. The findings of the project will be reported to Committee in due course.

4. Legal Powers

Town and Country Planning Act 1995 Local Government and Housing Act 1989 Local Government Act 2000 Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004

6. Risk Analysis and Staffing Implications

6.1 The Development Control section has not been at full establishment. There are staff vacancies and the service is finding it difficult to recruit new staff due to the national shortage of professional officers.

6.2 In order to deal with the high intake level of planning applications and meet with required government targets and progress, the retention of knowledgeable and experienced staff is essential.

6.3. Financial Implications

To maintain government required performance, the agency contract may need to be extended. There is a significant cost to this.

6.4 Implications for Sustainable Development

6.5 Improvements to the planning service will ensure that development of the built environment is in accordance with sustainability principles.

6.6 Implications for Equal Opportunities

6.7 The improvement measures will further enhance the capability of the service to be made to the needs of all members of the community.

6.8 Implications for Community Safety

6.9 Development Control process seeks to ensure safety in design of built environment.

6.10 Implications for Health Improvement None

6.11 Implications for Property None

7. Recommendations

7.1 That the Committee note the sustained level of performance of the Development Control Service in respect of the number of applications decided within the statutory period. That the Committee support the efforts made by the Development Control service to continue to increase speed of determining applications within the statutory period.

7.2 That the Committee support the plans for further improvement.

8. Author and Contact Officer Rebecca Yee, Regulatory Services Manager

9. Consultees Director of Environment and Economy

10. Background Papers ODPM Creating Sustainable Communities-National Statistical Release: Planning Applications. ODPM R News Release: 2004 and 2005.

6 List of Data Tables APPENDIX 1

Table 1: Percentage of applications decided, by development type and speed of decision in Wellingborough (01/04/03 – 31/03/05) 1/04/03 – 31/03/04 1/04/04 – 31/03/05 % of Major Decisions within 13 33 78 weeks % of Minor Decisions within 8 57 75 weeks % of Other Decisions within 8 84 90 weeks % of Applications within 8 76 84 weeks

Table 2: PENDLETON CRITERIA RESULTS

NORTHAMPTONSHIRE COUNCILS Other Council Scores 19 and Over

Score Corby Borough 7 Bracknell Forest 21 Daventry District 8 Bury Metropolitan Borough 19 East Northamptonshire 15 Cotswold District 20 District Northampton Borough 14 Gateshead Metropolitan 19 Borough South Northamptonshire 13 Hammersmith and Fulham 20 District Borough Borough of 19 Hillingdon London Borough 19 Wellingborough Kettering Borough 16 Huntingdonshire District 20 Harborough Borough 18 Newcastle upon Tyne Borough 20 Nottingham City 19 Rushcliffe Borough 20 Shrewsbury and Alcham 20 Borough Wandsworth London Borough 21 West Dorset District 19 Wigan Metropolitan Borough 19

7 APPENDIX 2

Table 3: Percentage of applications decided within 8 weeks in Wellingborough (1/4/02- 31/3/05) 01/04/02- 31/03/03 Total % Total % of Applications within 8 weeks 75 691 % of decisions delegated to officers 77

01/04/03- 01/03/04 Total % Total % of Applications within 8 weeks 75 727 % of decisions delegated to officers 81

01/04/04- 31/03/05 Total % Total % of Applications within 8 weeks 84 767 % of decisions delegated to officers 92

Table 4: Percentage of applications decided within 8 weeks & delegated decisions, in Northamptonshire (1/1/04-31/12/04) Planning Authority % within 8 weeks % of decisions delegated to Officers Corby 77 83 Daventry 78 86 East Northamptonshire 74 85 Kettering 80 81 Northampton 73 85 South Northamptonshire 82 89 Wellingborough 81 91