Planning Committee Wednesday 19 December 2012 at 7.00 Pm

Planning Committee

Wednesday 19 December 2012 at 7.00 pm

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

1. Apologies for absence. Ι 2. Declarations of Interest (completed forms to be handed to the committee clerk). Ι 3. Confirmation of the minutes of the meeting held on 21/11/2012. Ι 4. Applications for planning permission, listed building consent, building regulation approval and appeal information. Ι 5. Any other items that the Chairman decides are urgent.

Ι Enclosed

Site Viewing Group for Tuesday 18 December 2012 will be Councillors Ward, Griffiths, Waters, Morrall and Maguire.

John T Campbell Chief Executive

Date issued: 11 December 2012.

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

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

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

Swanspool House, Doddington Road, Wellingborough, Northamptonshire NN8 1BP Tel: 01933 229777 Fax: 01933 231684 www.wellingborough.gov.uk BOROUGH COUNCIL OF WELLINGBOROUGH AGENDA ITEM 2 PLANNING COMMITTEE 19TH DECEMBER 2012

DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST UNDER THE CODE OF CONDUCT

When the Chairman calls for declarations of interest in matters to be considered at the meeting you must declare orally: • any relevant ‘Registrable Interest’ that is not in the register of interests, • any relevant ‘Other Interest’. Registrable interests in the register of interests do not need to be declared orally to the meeting.

Members are reminded that if they have a registrable Interest that is a disclosable pecuniary interest in any matter to be considered at the meeting they cannot participate, or participate further, in any discussion of the matter at the meeting; or participate in any vote, or further vote, taken on the matter at the meeting unless they have first obtained a dispensation from the Monitoring Officer in advance of the meeting.

An extract from the Code of Conduct relating to declarations of interest is printed on the reverse of this form.

Please write down your interests in the table below. If you have no registrable interests to declare, please state ‘none’ on the form. You are still required to declare your interest orally at the meeting.

Councillor name: Committee/date/ Title Type of interest Reason for interest minute number (please tick) Registerable DPI Other Registerable DPI Other Registerable

DPI Other Registerable DPI Other Registerable DPI Other

Registerable DPI Other Please place this completed declaration form in the basket (on the table next to the exit) at the end of the meeting to ensure your declaration is recorded accurately.

Declaration of interests: page 1 of 5 Extract (modified) from the Code of Conduct 2012 Part 2 – Interests

4 Registerable Interests 4.1 You must within 28 days of this Code being adopted by or applied to the authority; or your election or appointment to office (where that is later), notify the Monitoring Officer in writing of the details of your interests within the following categories, for inclusion in the authority’s register of interests: 4.1.1 any disclosable pecuniary interests you are required to disclose. You have a disclosable pecuniary interest if it is of a description specified in regulations made by the Secretary of State (see Appendix A) and either: (a) it is an interest of yours, or (b) it is an interest of: (i) your spouse or civil partner; (ii) a person with whom you are living as husband and wife, or (iii) a person with whom you are living as if you were civil partners and you are aware that that other person has the interest. 4.1.2 details of any body of which you are a member or in a position of general control or management and to which you are appointed or nominated by your authority 4.1.3 details of any body exercising functions of a public nature, any body directed to charitable purposes or any body one of whose principal purposes includes the influence of public opinion or policy (including any political party or trade union), of which you are: (a) a member, or (b) in a position of general control or management; 4.2 You are expected to ensure that your register of interests is kept up to date and notify the Monitoring Officer in writing within 28 days of becoming aware of any change in respect of your disclosable pecuniary interests and other registerable interests. 4.3 You may inform the Monitoring Officer if you consider that disclosure of the details of the interest could lead to you, or a person connected with you, being subject to violence or intimidation. If the Monitoring Officer agrees with your view, the interest is treated as a “sensitive interest” for the purposes of the Code 4.4 If a sensitive interest is entered in the authority’s register, copies of the register that are made available for inspection, and any published version of the register, will not include details of the interest (but may state you have an interest the details of which are withheld).

5 Disclosure of Interests and Participation at Meetings 5.1 If you attend a meeting and 5.1.1 have and are or become aware, or should reasonably be aware, that you have an interest of the type described in paragraph 4.1 above in any matter to be considered, or being considered, at that meeting, and 5.1.2 the interest is not entered in the authority’s register of members’ interests, you should (and must if the interest is a disclosable pecuniary interest) disclose to the meeting the fact that you have an interest in that matter and the nature of that interest, at or before the consideration of the item of business or as soon as the interest becomes apparent. 5.2 Where your interest is a “sensitive interest” for the purposes of the Code, you need not disclose the details of the sensitive interest to the meeting, but merely the fact that you have an interest in the matter concerned. 5.3 If you have and are aware or become aware, or should reasonably be aware, that you have 5.3.1 a disclosable pecuniary interest in any matter to be considered, or being considered, at a meeting, or 5.3.2 any other registerable interest in any matter to be considered, or being considered, at a meeting, and (a) the matter to be considered, or being considered, at that meeting: (i) affects your financial position or the financial position of a person or body through whom the interest arises ;or (ii) relates to the determining of any approval, consent, licence, permission or registration in relation to you or any person through whom the interest arises, and (b) the interest is one which a member of the public with knowledge of the relevant facts would reasonably regard as so significant that it is likely to prejudice your judgment of the public interest1, you should not, and must not if the interest is a disclosable pecuniary interest,: 5.3.3 participate, or participate further, in any discussion of the matter at the meeting other than to the extent permitted by the authority’s Procedure Rules in respect of registerable interests other than disclosable pecuniary interests2; or 5.3.4 participate in any vote, or further vote, taken on the matter at the meeting unless you have first obtained a dispensation from the Monitoring Officer in advance of the meeting. In addition, i f the authority’s Procedure Rules require you to leave the room where the meeting is held while any discussion or voting on the matter takes place, you must do so. 5.4 “Meeting” means any meeting organised by or on behalf of the authority, including: 5.4.1 any meeting of the authority, or a committee or sub-committee of the authority (including joint committees and joint sub- committees) 5.4.2 meetings of working parties 5.4.3 any briefing by officers (e.g. to political groups or lead advisers); and 5.4.4 any site visit to do with business of the authority 5.5 If you seek to discuss with an officer a matter that, if it were to be considered at a meeting of the authority, you would not be able to participate in the discussion of, or voting on, by virtue of the matter relating to a registerable interest of yours, you are expected to inform the officer of that interest in advance of any discussion and accept that the officer has discretion as to whether or not to discuss the matter with you; save that he or she cannot treat you less favourably than he or she would treat a member of the public wishing to discuss a matter of the same type.

6 Other Interests 6.1 In addition to the requirements of Paragraph 5, where you have an interest described in paragraph 6.3 below in any business of the authority, and 6.1.1 where you are aware or ought reasonably to be aware of the existence of that interest, and 6.1.2 you attend a meeting of the authority at which the business is considered, you are expected to disclose to that meeting the existence and nature of that interest at the commencement of that consideration, or when the interest becomes apparent. 6.2 Where your interest is a “sensitive interest” for the purposes of this Code, you need not disclose the details of the sensitive interest to the meeting, but merely the fact that you have an interest in the matter concerned. 6.3 You have an interest for the purposes of paragraph 6.1 of this Code where:

1 A registerable interest that satisfies the tests in paragraphs 5.3.2 (a) and (b) shall be known as a prejudicial interest for the purpose of declarations of interest at a meeting. 2 These rules are to the effect that if the matter is one on which an ordinary member of the public would be allowed to address the meeting you are provided with the same opportunity. If an ordinary member of the public is not allowed to speak on the matter, you cannot do so. Declaration of interests: page 2 of 5 6.3.1 a decision in relation to that matter might reasonably be regarded as affecting the well-being or financial standing of you or a member of your family or a person or body with whom you have a close association to a greater extent than it would affect the majority of the Council Tax payers, ratepayers or inhabitants of the ward or electoral area for which you have been elected or otherwise of the authority’s administrative area, or 6.3.2 it relates to or is likely to affect any of the interests listed in the Table in the Appendix A to this Code, but in respect of a member of your family (other than a “relevant person”) or a person with whom you have a close association and you are aware that that other person has the interest and that interest is not a disclosable pecuniary interest or any interest you should register in accordance with paragraph 4 of this Code. 6.4 If the matter to be considered, or being considered, at that meeting: 6.4.1 affects your financial position or the financial position of a person or body through whom the interest arises ;or 6.4.2 relates to the determining of any approval, consent, licence, permission or registration in relation to you or any person through whom the interest arises, and 6.4.3 the interest is one which a member of the public with knowledge of the relevant facts would reasonably regard as so significant that it is likely to prejudice your judgment of the public interest3, you should not: 6.4.4 participate, or participate further, in any discussion of the matter at the meeting other than to the extent permitted by the authority’s Procedure Rules for such interests4; or 6.4.5 participate in any vote, or further vote, taken on the matter at the meeting unless you have first obtained a dispensation from the Monitoring Officer in advance of the meeting. In addition, i f the authority’s Procedure Rules require you to leave the room where the meeting is held while any discussion or voting on the matter takes place, you must do so. 6.5 If you seek to discuss with an officer a matter that, if it were to be considered at a meeting of the authority, you would not be able to participate in the discussion of, or voting on, by virtue of the matter relating to an interest of yours of the type described in paragraph 6.3, you are expected to inform the officer of that interest in advance of any discussion and accept that the officer has discretion as to whether or not to discuss the matter with you; save that he or she cannot treat you less favourably than he or she would treat a member of the public wishing to discuss a matter of the same type.

------

Appendix A

Disclosable Pecuniary Interests The duties to register, disclose and not to participate in respect of any matter in which a member has a Disclosable Pecuniary Interest (DPI) are set out in Chapter 7 of the Localism Act 2011. Breaches of the rules relating to DPIs may lead to criminal sanctions being imposed. Chapter 7 of the Localism Act 2011 provides that a pecuniary interest is a “disclosable pecuniary interest” in relation to a member (M), if it is of a description specified in regulations made by the Secretary of State and either: (a) it is an interest of M’s, or (b) it is an interest of: (i) M’s spouse or civil partner, (ii) a person with whom M is living as husband and wife, or (iii) a person with whom M is living as if they were civil partners, and M is aware that that other person has the interest. DPIs are defined in The Relevant Authorities (Disclosable Pecuniary Interests) Regulations 2012 (SI No. 1464) as follows: Interest Prescribed description Employment, office, trade Any employment, office, trade, profession or vocation carried on for profit or gain. profession or vocation Sponsorship Any payment or provision of any other financial benefit (other than from the relevant authority) made or provided within the relevant period in respect of any expenses incurred by M in carrying out duties as a member, or towards the election expenses of M. This includes any payment or financial benefit from a trade union within the meaning of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992). Contracts Any contract which is made between the relevant person (or a body in which the relevant person has a beneficial interest) and the relevant authority— (a) under which goods or services are to be provided or works are to be executed; and (b) which has not been fully discharged. Land Any beneficial interest in land which is within the area of the relevant authority. Licences Any licence (alone or jointly with others) to occupy land in the area of the relevant authority for a month or longer. Corporate tenancies Any tenancy where (to M’s knowledge)— (a) the landlord is the relevant authority; and (b) the tenant is a body in which the relevant person has a beneficial interest. Securities Any beneficial interest in securities of a body where— (a) that body (to M’s knowledge) has a place of business or land in the area of the relevant authority; and (b) either— (i) the total nominal value of the securities exceeds £25,000 or one hundredth of the total issued share capital of that body; or (ii) if the share capital of that body is of more than one class, the total nominal value of the shares of any one class in which the relevant person has a beneficial interest exceeds one hundredth of the total issued share capital of that class. For this purpose: “the Act” means the Localism Act 2011; “body in which the relevant person has a beneficial interest” means a firm in which the relevant person is a partner or a body corporate of which the relevant person is a director, or in the securities of which the relevant person has a beneficial interest; “director” includes a member of the committee of management of an industrial and provident society; “land” excludes an easement, servitude, interest or right in or over land which does not carry with it a right for the relevant person (alone or jointly with another) to occupy the land or to receive income; “M” means a member of a relevant authority; “member” includes a co-opted member; “relevant authority” means the authority of which M is a member; “relevant period” means the period of 12 months ending with the day on which M gives a notification for the purposes of section 30(1) or 31(7), as the case may be, of the Act;

3 An other interest that satisfies the tests in paragraphs 6.4.1 to 6.4.3 shall also be known as a prejudicial interest for the purpose of declarations of interest at a meeting. 4 These rules are to the effect that if the matter is one on which an ordinary member of the public would be allowed to address the meeting you are provided with the same opportunity. If an ordinary member of the public is not allowed to speak on the matter, you cannot do so. Declaration of interests: page 3 of 5 “relevant person” means M or M’s spouse or civil partner, a person with whom M is living as husband and wife, or a person with whom M is living as if they were civil partners; “securities” means shares, debentures, debenture stock, loan stock, bonds, units of a collective investment scheme within the meaning of the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 and other securities of any description, other than money deposited with a building society.

Declaration of interests: page 4 of 5 DECLARING INTERESTS FLOWCHART – QUESTIONS TO ASK YOURSELF

What matters are being discussed at the meeting?

Do any relate to my interests? A Does the matter affect my registerable interests? OR B Does it: • affect the well-being or financial standing of me or a member of my family or a person or body with whom I have a close association to a greater extent than it would affect the majority of the Council Tax payers, ratepayers or inhabitants of the ward for which I have been elected, or • relate to or is likely to affect any of the interests listed in the Table in Appendix A of the Code, but in respect of a member of my family (other than a “relevant person”) or a person or body with whom I have a close association AND that interest is not a registerable interest?

Is the interest on Disclose the existence and You cannot the register of participate in the NO nature of your interests? interest. meeting and vote unless you have a dispensation. YES Also, withdraw from the meeting by leaving Is it a disclosable You can the room. YES pecuniary interest? participate in In the interests of the meeting transparency tell the and vote. Chairman your reason NO

Does the matter:

You should not • affect my financial position or the financial position of a person or body participate in the through whom the interest arises; or meeting and vote, unless you have a • relate to the determining of any approval, dispensation. consent, licence, permission or registration in relation to me or any Also, withdraw from the person through whom the interest arises, meeting by leaving the YES AND room. Is the interest one which a member of the In the interests of public with knowledge of the relevant facts transparency tell the would reasonably regard as so significant Chairman your reason that it is likely to prejudice my judgment of for withdrawing the public interest?

Declaration of interests: page 5 of 5 Agenda item 4

Borough Council of Wellingborough Planning Committee Wednesday 19th December 2012 at 7.00 pm Council Chamber, Swanspool House

INDEX

Page No. SITE VIEWING GROUP

WP/2012/0372/F - 32 Thrift Street, Irchester 1 WP/2012/0373/F - Land adjacent 32 Thrift Street, Irchester. 6 WP/2012/0500/FCOU - First Floor, 39b Cambridge Street, Wellingborough. 16

DISTRICT

WP/2012/0392/F - Slype Farm, Easton Lane, Bozeat. 21 WP/2012/0416/OM - Land east of Doddington Road, Doddington Road, Wellingborough. 31 WP/2012/0458/DOC - Land off the A509 Niort Way and A510 Northen Way and south of Great Harrowden. 43 WP/2012/0525/TX - Land off the A509 Niort Way and A510 Northen Way and south of Great Harrowden. 72

OTHER BOROUGH/COUNTY

WP/2012/0495/C - Sewage Works, A45 Nene Valley Way, Ecton. 94

- 1 -

BOROUGH COUNCIL OF WELLINGBOROUGH

SITE VIEWING (Date of visit Tuesday 18th December 2012 at 10.20 a.m.)

Planning Committee 19/12/2012

Report of the Head of Planning and Local Development

APPLICATION REF: WP/2012/0372/F

PROPOSAL: Conversion of existing 3 bedroom dwelling to 2 no. two bedroom flats involving alterations to the rear elevation and the erection of a rear staircase access to the proposed first floor flat. Re-submission - amended plans.

LOCATION: 32 Thrift Street, Irchester, Wellingborough. NN29 7DU

APPLICANT: Mr S McLester, R McLester Builders Limited.

This application is referred to the Planning Committee for determination because an objection has been received from the Irchester Parish Council which has also requested a visit from the Site Viewing Group.

PROPOSAL AND DESCRIPTION OF SITE: As described.

The application site is a vacant end of terrace dwellinghouse with an area of derelict land adjoining to the side and rear.

Amended plans were received on 28 November 2012 which corrected a drafting error and altered the rear stairwell arrangement.

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY: WP/2005/0700 Proposed demolition of existing sub standard buildings (retention of no. 32 and conversion to 2 no. 1 bed flats) plus 17 no. 2 bed flats together with associated external works – allowed at Appeal WP/2009/0508 Application to extend the time limit for implementation for WP/2005/0700/F demolition of existing buildings (retention of no. 32 and conversion to 2 no. 1 bed flats) plus 17 no. 2 bed flats together with associated external works – dismissed at Appeal WP/2012/0373/F Residential development consisting of 4 no. 3 bedroom dwellings, 1 no. 2 bedroom dwelling and 2 no. 1-2 bedroom maisonettes including access, 18 parking spaces and associated shared and private amenity space – is also being considered.

NATIONAL GUIDANCE, DEVELOPMENT PLAN POLICY AND SUPPLEMENTARY PLANNING DOCUMENTS/GUIDANCE: National Planning Policy Framework

WP/2012/0372/F 20 1

7 War

9 2 Meml 34 13 38

Irchester 40 29

51 14

WarehouseA

18 84.0m 63 WOLLASTON ROAD

1 73 2

75 2 6 THRIFT STREET 8

7 10 28

11 ORCHARD PLACE

2 14

15 11

24 14 15

17 32

BERRILL STREET 24

23 to29

21 26

ASH CLOSE

30 23

32 8

2 2

39 1

34 24 37 OAK CLOSE 8 2 10 20

35 44

47 1 27

COULON CLOSE

49 26 9 14 LegendPath 13 WP/2012/0372/F - 32 Thrift Street, Irchester

32 Description 14 Planning & Local Development © Crown Copyright and database right 2012. Applicant's Property Scale: Ordnance Survey 100018694. This map is accurate 1:1,250 Cities Revealed to the scale specified Aerial Photography copyright: when reproduced at A4 Application Site ± GetMapping PLC 1999 - 2 -

North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy 1 (Strengthening the network of Settlements) 13 (General sustainable development principles) and 14 (Energy efficiency and sustainable construction) Borough of Wellingborough Local Plan: G4 (Development within the limited development and restricted infill villages) Supplementary Planning Document; Northamptonshire Minerals and Waste Development Framework – Development and Implementation Principles, Sustainable Design, Biodiversity Supplementary Planning Guidance: Parking, Planning Out Crime, Residential Extensions – A Guide to Good Design

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

“WP/2012/0372 and 0373/F - 32 Thrift Street Irchester - with reference to the development the pc had no concerns or objections however with regards to the access to the site through Oak Close this was regarded as too narrow, unsuitable and dangerous and a safety hazard for emergency vehicles, pedestrians, cyclists and particularly residents of no 7 and 8 Oak close as the access design was a sharp corner and blind bend. The pc have therefore requested a site meeting in order to look at this situation.”

2. Northamptonshire County Council Highway Authority –

“This application relies for parking accommodation and means of access thereto upon the proposals subject of planning application WP/2012/0373/F. Prior to first occupation of the dwelling units satisfactory vehicular access, parking and turning facilities must be provided.”

3. Councillor Elliott – objects to the application and refers to comments made with regards linked application WP/2012/0373.

“This application is more suited to the area than the previous one that was subject to appeal. There is a need for smaller houses in this area and the site does require development. But there is a serious impact on the residential amenity of no's 7 and particularly 8 from the access arrangements.

It is also unclear whether the loop design of the access provides a proper separation between the road and the footway.”

4. Neighbours – letter of support received from the occupier of 1 Ash Close. The writer states that the application will make excellent use of a derelict site involving the removal of an asbestos building. The writer goes on to say that a view of houses will be an improvement.

ASSESSMENT: The material planning considerations are:

• Compliance with policy • Effect on neighbours amenities - 3 -

• Effect on the character of the area • Highway Safety • Crime and disorder • Biodiversity

Compliance with policy Policy 1 of the North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy states that in the rural areas development will take place on sites within village boundaries, subject to criteria to be set out in development plan documents.

With regards to the Borough of Wellingborough Local Plan, Irchester is defined as a restricted infill village by Policy G4 and the application site is clearly located within the Irchester Village Policy Line. Policy G4 does state however that development will be granted planning permission subject to more specific policies and if it does not have an adverse impact on the size, form, character and setting of the village and its environs.

Upon the face of it, the principle of the development could be acceptable, but other more specific aspects of policy are examined below.

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

It is accepted that the proposed development could have an effect on the standard of amenity that is currently enjoyed by the surrounding residential occupiers. However, it is anticipated the scheme will not have such a deleterious effect on them to warrant recommending the application for refusal.

There have been no objections received from the neighbouring occupiers.

Effect on the character of the area With regards the North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy (NNCSS) the following chapter 13 policies are relevant:

• (h) new development should be of a high standard of design, architecture and landscaping, respect and enhance the character of its surroundings. • (i) development should create a strong sense of place by strengthening the distinctive historic and cultural qualities and townscape of the towns and villages through its design, landscaping and use of public art. • (o) development should conserve and enhance the landscape character; historic landscape designated built environmental assets and their settings, and biodiversity of the environment making reference to the Environmental Character Assessment and Green Infrastructure Strategy.

Policy 15 (f) of the NNCSS goes on to state that in order to deliver sustainable residential communities higher densities will be sought particularly in the locations most accessible on foot, cycle and public transport, although increases in density should not detract from the traditional streetscape and built form where this is worthy of safeguarding. - 4 -

As mentioned above, Policy G4 of the local plan states that development will be granted planning permission subject to more specific policies and if it does not have an adverse impact on the size, form, character and setting of the village and its environs

The extension is located at the rear of the dwellinghouse and will have no material effect on the character of the area.

Highway Safety Policy 13 (d) of the North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy says that new development should provide for parking, servicing and manoeuvring in accordance with adopted standards. Policy 13 (n) reinforces the requirement for development not to cause a danger to highway safety by stating that development should not have an adverse impact on the highway network and will not prejudice highway safety.

The comments regarding the highway safety aspects of the proposal are acknowledged. However, it is thought that the intended 18 off road car parking spaces for this flat conversion and the proposed development on the adjacent site is acceptable.

Significantly, it should be noted that the Northamptonshire County Council Highway Authority has not objected to the scheme.

It is considered that there are no substantial reasons for opposing the application on the grounds of danger to highway safety.

Crime and disorder Policy 13 (b) of the North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy requires development to seek to design out antisocial behaviour, crime and reduce the fear of crime by applying the principles of the Secured by Design scheme.

Also a material consideration is the adopted Supplementary Planning Guidance ‘Planning Out Crime’.

It is suggested that bringing the building back into use could have a positive influence on anti-social behaviour by preventing nefarious activities taking place in the vacant dwellinghouse.

Biodiversity Policy 13 (o) of the North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy states, inter alia, that development should conserve and enhance biodiversity. No biodiversity issues have been identified within the scope of the application.

Conclusion The application is considered to be acceptable subject to conditions.

RECOMMENDATION: Approve with conditions.

- 5 -

1. The development shall be begun not later than the expiration of three years beginning with the date of this permission. 2. The external walls and roof of the extension shall be constructed with materials of the same type, texture and colour as the external walls and roof of the existing building, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the local planning authority. 3. The areas shown for parking and manoeuvring on the approved plans shall be laid out and surfaced to the satisfaction of the local planning authority before the flats are first occupied and shall be permanently set aside and reserved for the purpose.

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 the safety and convenience of users of the adjoining highways.

INFORMATIVES 1. Pursuant to Section 38 (6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004, the proposed development complies with the applicable development plan policies and there are no other material considerations that would constitute sustainable grounds for refusal. These include specifically the following policies: North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy 1 (Strengthening the network of Settlements) 13 (General sustainable development principles) and 14 (Energy efficiency and sustainable construction) Borough of Wellingborough Local Plan: G4 (Development within the limited development and restricted infill villages). 2. The applicant is advised that this decision relates to the following drawing numbers received on the dates shown: Drawing Number: Date Received: 12-060-05 D 29 October 2012 12-060-06 C and 12/060/10 C 28 November 2012 3. The Public Health Act 1875 and the Town Improvement Clauses Act 1847 at S.64 Prior to occupation of the newly created premises(s), the street numbering for this development must be agreed with the Street Naming and Numbering Officer. When issued, the number allocated must be clearly displayed on the outside of the property. Application forms for Street Naming and Numbering are available at www.wellingborough.gov.uk - 6 -

BOROUGH COUNCIL OF WELLINGBOROUGH

SITE VIEWING (Date of visit Tuesday 18th December 2012 at 10.20 a.m.)

Planning Committee 19/12/2012

Report of the Head of Planning and Local Development

APPLICATION REF: WP/2012/0373/F

PROPOSAL: Residential development consisting of 4 no. 3 bedroom dwellings, 1 no. 2 bedroom dwelling and 2 no. 1-2 bedroom maisonettes including access, 18 parking spaces and associated shared and private amenity space - amended plans and additional information.

LOCATION: Land adjacent 32 Thrift Street, Irchester, Wellingborough. NN29 7DU

APPLICANT: Mr S McLester, R McLester Builders Limited.

The application is referred to the Planning Committee for determination for the following reasons:

• A request by the Parish Council for a visit from the Site Viewing Group has been made • The number of representations received from third parties

PROPOSAL AND DESCRIPTION OF SITE: As described.

The application site is overgrown and has a derelict building on it.

The western side of Thrift Street is predominantly terraced. On the opposite side of Thrift Street to the application site is Stringer Court which has a private parking area.

Access to the application site would be gained from Oak Close which is a cul-de-sac.

Amended plans were received on 28 November 2012 which corrected a minor drafting error.

WP/2012/0373/F20 1

7 War

9 2 Meml 34 13 38

Irchester 40 29

51 14

WarehouseA

18 84.0m 63 WOLLASTON ROAD

1 73 2 4

75 2 6

THRIFT STREET 8 30

7 10 28

ORCHARD PLACE 32

2 14

15 11

24 14 15

17 32

BERRILL STREET 24

23 to29 26 21

ASH CLOSE 13

30 23

32 8

2 2

39 1

34 24 37 OAK CLOSE 8 2 10 20

35 44

47 1 27

COULON CLOSE

49 26 9 14 Path

Legend 13

32 WP/2012/0373/F - Adjacent 32 Thrift Street, Irchester

Description 14 Planning & Local Development © Crown Copyright and database right 2012. Applicant's Property Scale: Ordnance Survey 100018694. ROAD This map is accurate 1:1,250 Cities Revealed Application Site to the scale specified Aerial Photography copyright: when reproduced at A4 ± GetMapping PLC 1999 - 7 -

WP/2009/0508 Application to extend the time limit for implementation for WP/2005/0700 demolition of existing buildings (retention of no. 32 and conversion to 2 no. 1 bed flats) plus 17 no. 2 bed flats together with associated external works – Appeal dismissed

An application at no. 32 Thrift Street for the conversion of the existing 3 bedroom dwelling to 2 no. two bedroom flats involving alterations to the rear elevation and the erection of a rear staircase access to the proposed first floor flat – WP/2012/0372/F refers – is also being considered. This application includes its off road parking provision within the site area of this scheme.

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

SUMMARY OF REPLIES TO CONSULTATIONS/REPRESENTATIONS RECEIVED: Amended and additional plans and a revised Design and Access Statement were received on 20 October 2012 after which a second round of consultation and publicity was undertaken. A summary of the replies that were received to both consultation/publicity exercises is given below.

1. Irchester Parish Council –

“WP/2012/0372 and 0373/F - 32 Thrift Street Irchester - With reference to the development the pc had no concerns or objections however with regards to the access to the site through Oak Close this was regarded as too narrow, unsuitable and dangerous and a safety hazard for emergency vehicles, pedestrians, cyclists and particularly residents of no 7 and 8 Oak close as the access design was a sharp corner and blind bend. The pc have therefore requested a site meeting in order to look at this situation.”

2. Northamptonshire County Council Highway Authority –

“You should satisfy yourself as to the adequacy of parking accommodation to be provided to serve the proposed development.

The amended plan includes a slight interference with the existing footway at the junction of the site with Oak Close. This alteration must be constructed in accordance with the specification of Northamptonshire County Council and subject to the Highways Act 1980 to be entered into for the remainder of the highway construction works. - 8 -

No objection to the application is raised on highway safety or capacity grounds.”

3. Northamptonshire County Council Fire and Rescue Service – no comment received.

4. Wellingborough Norse – no comment received.

5. Borough Council of Wellingborough Planning and Local Development (Housing) – no comment received.

6. Borough Council of Wellingborough Planning and Local Development (Policy and Regeneration) – no comment received.

7. Borough Council of Wellingborough Resources (Property) – no comment received.

8. Borough Council of Wellingborough Landscape Officer – no comment received.

9. Borough Council of Wellingborough Design and Conservation Officer – is content with the design of the amended scheme.

10. Borough Council of Wellingborough Community (Environmental Health) – indentifies that the submitted Environmental Risk Assessment has recognized the need to remove contamination from the site and for it to be replaced with certified suitable soil. Recommends that a condition be imposed on any permission to ensure that this operation is carried out.

11. Longhurst Group Limited – no comment received.

12. Northamptonshire Police – has no formal objection to the application but offers recommendations with regards to crime prevention measures that could be incorporated into the build.

13. Environment Agency – makes reference to the submitted Environmental Risk Assessment and also recommends a condition to address the contamination on the site

14. North Northants Joint Planning Unit – made detailed comments on the initial design. No comment received regarding the amended plans.

15. Neighbours – concerns and objections have been received from and on behalf of the occupiers of 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7 and 8 Oak Close; 8 Thrift Street

The reasons cited for opposing the application are:

- 9 -

• no objections and in favour of the site being developed with the house styles proposed, but oppose the plans as being detrimental to Oak Close residents • proposed development is an improvement on what has previously been approved and has many good points • would be admirable and courteous if the builders were prepared to talk to the Oak close residents to achieve mutual satisfaction • reference to Irchester being a town in the application • Ash Close is not a cul-de-sac. Reference to council erected barriers 20 years ago to stop Oak Close being opened up into the Woodyard and a precedent was set. Oak Close has always been a cul-de-sac • existing traffic difficulties in Thrift Street • Oak Close does not offer safe access to the proposed development, the effect on Oak Close would be far worse • extra visitors to the new development would have to park in Oak Close and visitor who park in Oak Close would have to shift to Woodlands Road • reference to Appeal decision where the Inspector concluded that a more dense scheme would not have an unacceptable impact on highway safety when access was proposed to be taken from Thrift Street • visibility of Thrift Street junction onto Wollaston Road is no worse than other nearby junctions • access to the site during building operations would have a major impact on nearby neighbours and have health and safety issues. Mud would be left on the road • curve in the new access road will be dangerous and would be dangerous for nearby residents when manoeuvring their vehicles into the path of vehicles from the development. Would also be dangerous for pedestrians and cyclists, many of whom are young children or the elderly. The curve would also prevent access for fire engines and waste disposal vehicles • rumble strip would be noisy • motorbikes and scooters use the pathway to Thrift Street as a short cut and is a safety issue; barriers have been suggested, but there has been no response • no reason why the proposed development cannot be accessed via Thrift Street • inappropriate to use Ash Close to demonstrate the suitability of Oak Close • Thrift Street residents have parking available at the rear of their properties • more dwellings will result in more traffic so greedy developers can make a fast buck • does money talk? • inappropriately parked cars in front of no 8 Oak Close are those that reside there or are visitors • ‘town’ development is being pushed through at the expense of the Oak Close community • suggestion of a children’s playground being developed on the site • guarantee required that the correct health and safety procedures will be followed when the asbestos building is removed • query lodged with regards to how the land which forms the application site was acquired - 10 -

• will compensation be paid by the builders for access difficulty? • applicant has not contacted local residents regarding the scheme’s boundary space • query regarding possible development tenure • impact on financial status of properties in Oak Close

Letters of no objection/support have been received from the occupiers of 1 Ash Close; 4, 10, 12 Thrift Street; 71 Woodlands Road. The reasons cited for not objecting or supporting the application are:

• Thrift Street is already congested with many households having two cars and no parking. In addition there are other local generators of parking demand • access from Oak Close is a much safer option • proposed access is along a road where most residents have off road parking and emergency services will get easier access • Thrift Street is 122m long and has no turning area. The Stringer Court area is for residents only. Whilst Oak Close is 64m long and has an official turning head at the end • Oak Close is narrower but its residents have off street parking • Waste collection vehicles will not need to enter into the development site, therefore no issue with the access from Oak Close • total number of dwellings served by Oak Close would be 16; total number of dwellings if the access were to be taken from Thrift Street would be 26. Therefore access via Thrift Street would not be a good idea • visibility is impaired at the road junction due to parked cars • development is in keeping with the area • excellent use of a derelict site which is an eyesore and view over the site will be improved

Other neighbour comments have been received from the occupiers of 29 Berrill Street; 8 Orchard Place, 93 Woodlands Road:

• reference to the problems associated with the derelict nature of the site and would be good to see the site being put to good use • reference to private rights of land title to a strip of land at the rear of the site which could cause issues with its future maintenance. If the title issues are resolved the application would be supported • the application is reasonable and it is time that the site was developed to provide more properties to meet the Irchester housing need. An unsightly brownfield site would be usefully developed which will help with the new home numbers in the Borough without construction in the open countryside • Thrift Street is narrow with dense car parking causing problems with through traffic • Orchard Place is an unadopted road maintained by its residents and requests have been made in the past to erect bollards at the Thrift Street entrance - 11 -

• Oak Close is a wider road and would be a possible solution to the passage of cars from the new development • if application is approved, conditions suggested to prevent deliveries at weekends, in the early morning and in the evening due to the proximity of elderly persons accommodation

16. Councillor Elliott – made the following comments on 8 September 2012:

This application is more suited to the area than the previous one that was subject to appeal. There is a need for smaller houses in this area and the site does require development.

But there is a serious impact on the residential amenity of no's 7 and particularly 8 from the access arrangements.

It is also unclear whether the loop design of the access provides a proper separation between the road and the footway.

ASSESSMENT: The material planning considerations are:

• Compliance with policy • Highway Safety • Effect on neighbours amenities • Effect on the character of the area • Crime and disorder • Biodiversity

The comments from the occupiers who live in the vicinity of the application site are noted and, in the main, they are split into two groups. Residents who live in Oak Close - 12 -

oppose the application, and the Thrift Street residents who have no objection or support the scheme.

It is thought that the intended 18 off road car parking spaces for the development and the adjacent flat conversion is acceptable. Clearly, the potential residents of the flat conversion at 32 Thrift Street would also have limited opportunity to park in the highway in front of that property.

Despite the number of local objections, it can be seen from the above that crucially the Northamptonshire County Council Highway Authority is content with the scheme with regards to matters of highway safety.

It is considered that there are no substantial reasons for opposing the application on the grounds of danger to highway safety.

Effect on the character of the area With regards the North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy (NNCSS) the following chapter 13 policies are relevant:

- 13 -

Am amended scheme has been produced by the applicant that is now considered to be acceptable in terms of its design and scale which is respectful of the existing development in the area.

Also a material consideration is the adopted Supplementary Planning Guidance ‘Planning Out Crime’.

The comments of the Police are noted and it is considered that its views on the scheme can be adequately brought to the attention of the applicant by way of an informative appended to the decision notice.

Biodiversity Policy 13 (o) of the North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy states, inter alia, that development should conserve and enhance biodiversity.

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

Conclusion The application is considered to be acceptable subject to conditions.

RECOMMENDATION: Approve with conditions.

1. The development shall be begun not later than the expiration of three years beginning with the date of this permission. 2. Before development is commenced representative samples of all external facing and roofing materials shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The development shall be carried out using the approved materials. 3. Before development is commenced a landscape scheme shall be submitted to and approved by the local planning authority in writing. 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. Before development commences a landscape management plan setting out the management responsibilities for all the landscape areas, other than privately owned domestic gardens, shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The landscape management plan shall be carried out as approved by the occupiers of the development. 5. Before development commences a scheme for screen fencing/walling shall be submitted to the local planning authority for approval in writing. The approved - 14 -

scheme shall be implemented before the dwellings are first occupied. 6. Before the dwellings are occupied a report shall be submitted to the local planning authority for approval in writing which details the removal of contaminated soils and the verification of the import of certified soils and their installation to the depth specified by the applicant's geo-environmental investigation No. 11-03-013. 7. Before development commences details of the intended porous hard surfacing materials for the access drive, car parking and manoeuvring areas, or the method for ensuring surface water is drained within the site, shall be submitted to the local planning authority for approval in writing. The development shall be carried out in accord with the approved details before the dwellings are first occupied. 8. The areas shown for parking and manoeuvring on the approved plans shall be laid out and surfaced to the satisfaction of the local planning authority before the dwellings are first occupied and shall be permanently set aside and reserved for the purpose. 9. Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995 (or any order revoking and re-enacting that Order with or without modification), the dwellings shall not be extended without the express planning permission of the local planning authority. 10. Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995 (or any order revoking and re-enacting that Order with or without modification) no outbuildings shall be erected in the curtilages of the dwellings without the express planning permission 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 visual amenity. 3. In the interests of visual amenity and biodiversity. 4. To ensure the landscaped areas are properly maintained in the interests of visual amenity. 5. In the interests of visual amenity, privacy and security. 6. In the interests of protecting human health 7. In the interests of promoting sustainable urban drainage. 8. In the interests of the safety and convenience of users of the adjoining highways. 9. To prevent overdevelopment of the site and to protect the amenities of the occupiers of the site. 10. To prevent overdevelopment of the site and to protect the amenities of the occupiers of the site.

efficiency and sustainable construction) Borough of Wellingborough Local Plan: G4 (Development within the limited development and restricted infill villages). 2. - Fencing to rear gardens should be close board fencing to a minimum height of 1.8m with lockable gates to the same height - Inter garden fencing should feature a close boarded privacy panel to a height of 1.8m located adjacent to the rear of the dwelling with the remaining fencing either to the same height or 1.4m CB with a 0.4m height diamond pattern trellis mounted on top. - The perimeter of the site should be secured on the two elevations that abut the parking spaces through the provision of close board fencing/walls to a minimum height of 1.8m to prevent casual intrusion. The elevation abutting the Oak Road development should be contained with the same boundary treatment used along the Stringer Court elevation. - The vehicle entrance should also be gated and feature separate pedestrian access a lighting scheme should be proposed for the parking area with lighting levels and uniformity in compliance with SBD - If cycle parking is also to be incorporated then secure points that enable the frame and both wheels to be locked using a single security locking device should be provided - The 'bin holding collection area' should be of sufficient size to hold all of the bins. 3. The applicant is advised that this decision relates to the following drawing numbers received on the dates shown: Drawing Numbers: Date Received: 12/060/08 and12/060/09 16 August 2012 P868/101 29 October 2012 12/060/06 C and 12/060/07 C 28 November 2012 4. The applicant is advised that planning permission does not automatically allow the construction of the vehicle crossing, details of which require the approval of the Highway Authority. In this regard you should contact the Team Leader Regulations, Sustainable Transport, Riverside House, Riverside Way, Northampton NN1 5NX prior to any construction/excavation works within the public highway. 5. The Public Health Act 1875 and the Town Improvement Clauses Act 1847 at S.64 Prior to occupation of the newly created premises(s), the street numbering for this development must be agreed with the Street Naming and Numbering Officer. When issued, the number allocated must be clearly displayed on the outside of the property. Application forms for Street Naming and Numbering are available at www.wellingborough.gov.uk - 16 -

BOROUGH COUNCIL OF WELLINGBOROUGH

SITE VIEWING (Date of visit Tuesday 18th December 2012 at 11.15 a.m.)

Planning Committee 19/12/2012

Report of the Head of Planning and Local Development

APPLICATION REF: WP/2012/0500/FCOU

PROPOSAL: Change of use from first floor offices to church.

LOCATION: First Floor, 39b Cambridge Street, Wellingborough.

APPLICANT: Pastor Paul Hamilton-Testrote, Christ Disciples Faith Ministries.

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

PROPOSAL AND DESCRIPTION OF SITE: As described above.

The application site is vacant first floor offices situated above an electrical retail business.

The site is located in the town centre conservation area.

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY: None recorded.

NATIONAL GUIDANCE, DEVELOPMENT PLAN POLICY AND SUPPLEMENTARY PLANNING DOCUMENTS/GUIDANCE: National Planning Policy Framework North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy (NNCSS): 1 (Strengthening the network of settlements) 8 (Delivering economic prosperity) 9 (Distribution and location of development) 13 (General sustainable development principles) 14 (Energy efficiency and sustainable construction) Supplementary Planning Documents: Northamptonshire Minerals and Waste Development Framework – Development and Implementation Principles, Sustainable Design, Biodiversity Wellingborough Town Centre Area Action Plan: WTC8 (Commercial fringe area) WTC12 (Wellingborough Town Centre Conservation Area) Supplementary Planning Guidance: Planning Out Crime, Parking

WP/2012/0500/FCOU 66.1m 33a Park Street

Methodist Church

1 to 4 to 1

Flats 14

1a 72 16 22 1

72a Club

33 66.8m 7

Hall 26 11 1 to 4 to 1

Flats 72b

40 74b

The Baptist 73 19 13 Tabernacle 3

12 ALMA STREET 11

38 YORK ROAD 20 Garage 40

23 Flats 1 to 15

Church 9

20 16 29

A 18Flats 1 to 3

1 to 55 (odd) Club 16 CHEQUERS LANE

12 31a Works 63.9m

TCB 5 62.6m

TCB Hunter Penrose Court Works

Works 3 PH 1 33 62.8m Club

8 18a 19 1 to 9

Dexters Chambers 27 28

28a

29 30

15 41 40 31 30a 14a 61.1m 14

Club 7 to 1 2 STREET 39 PH 33 19 to 25 37a 11

CAMBRIDGE 35 PH

8b 9

37 35a

8a 36

36a

8 37

7 37a 1 6 6a 38

3 3a 4 4a 5 5a

LB 39

39a

24a 40 41 GLOUCESTER PLACE

Rafferty's 27

(PH) The Crispin

31 to 34 to 31 26

28 (PH)

28a

28b

23 29

22a

29a 30

21a

21 32

MARKETSTREET

32a 33

33a Library 34

17 Granville Chambers Head 8 1 Post Office

9 3 5 to 9 Pebble Lane

GLENBANK 37

57.9m Telephone

Exchange 15 13

13 51

52 TCBs 19 11 21 53 23

MIDLAND ROAD 23a 25 38 50 25a 54 27a 27

10 29 31 55 64 65 33 35 37 39 41

43 45 47

9 66

49 Cheese Lane 56 63 53.6m

22 to 24 to 22 62 67

Market Street 61 68 8 40 58 60 Swans Lane 59

Bank TCB 47 69a69

Bank

71 44

Bank Planning & Local 17 Development © Crown Copyright and database right 2012. Scale: Ordnance Survey 100018694. Legend This map is accurate 1:1,250 Cities Revealed to the scale specified Aerial Photography copyright: when reproduced at A4 WP/2012/0500/FCOU - First Floor, 39b Cambridge Street, Wellingborough ± GetMapping PLC 1999 - 17 -

SUMMARY OF REPLIES TO CONSULTATIONS/REPRESENTATIONS RECEIVED: 1. The applicant has supplied the following additional information.

“I note that David Jones – Development Management Engineer – has raised concerns about traffic and parking. We are very aware of the implications and had already given it thought.

There is no way of guessing congregation size, as currently it is in the tens to twenties, but potentially could be 100 or more, but since we are very family oriented the number of cars involved would be a lot fewer, given that children and youth make up a sizable part.

Drop off in the corridor between Cambridge Street and Matalan will be encouraged, to make sure that Cambridge Street is not compromised, as will legal parking in designated areas.

As previously stated, the majority of use will be on Sundays between 9am and 2pm. Most other use is likely to be evenings when parking is not a huge issue. The main car park is not far away and within easy walking distance. There are also many places to park away from the area. We intend, assuming approval is granted, to approach Asda and Matalan with a view to coming to some agreement over use of their parking, particularly at off-peak periods, if either or both of them is agreeable.

It has to be noted that the Hindu Temple just around the corner has very little parking for a building that frequently attracts a large number of visitors above its normal congregation, yet it does not seem to have affected its ability to get planning permission. It is well within the same catchment area, in fact facing out onto two busy roads.”

2. Northamptonshire County Council Highway Authority – in the light of additional information supplied by the applicant concludes that it is unlikely that an objection to the proposal could be sustained on highway safety or capacity grounds.

3. Borough Council of Wellingborough Planning and Local Development (Policy and Regeneration) – no comment received.

4. Wellingborough Town Centre Partnership – no comment received.

5. Wellingborough BID Limited – no comment received.

6. Neighbours/Third Parties – an objection has been received from the occupier of 39 Cambridge Street.

“We wish to object to this planning application as I fear it will produce adverse noise that will impact on our retail business that is located below. We sell specialist Hi-Fi and Home Cinema equipment which requires people to audition the equipment and silence is imperative. We have significant sound insulation in our demonstration rooms, but this only goes so far. When we moved in, the upstairs - 18 -

property 39b was an office, which produced very low levels of noise, as you’d expect.

I fear that a church will produce much higher levels of noise and will cause us to relocate outside of Wellingborough, as our business will become untenable. I believe that a church gets significant rate relief and as we pay over £5000 a year in rates, this would be a loss to the Borough Council too.”

ASSESSMENT: Main issues and material planning considerations:

• Compliance with policy • Effect on the town centre conservation area • Highway safety and parking • Crime and disorder • Biodiversity • Effect on neighbours

Compliance with policy It is thought that the key policy to consider is policy WTC8 form the Wellingborough Town Centre Area Action Plan which refers to the Commercial Fringe Area. It states that an assembly use could be appropriate in the designated area provided it is compatible with other acceptable uses mentioned in the policy and will not result in the loss of a mix of the uses at ground floor level.

It is accepted that a church is a non-residential institution and falls within class D1 of the use classes order and is not an assembly and leisure use which is promoted by the town centre policy WTC8. However, it is considered that the proposal which would occupy first floor accommodation is otherwise acceptable because it would not conflict with the main aim of the policy which seeks to protect ground floor accommodation from inappropriate development.

It is suggested that there is no need to impose a condition which would restrict the use of the premises to a church only because the other types of development which could occupy the premises under the D1 use class would also be acceptable at first floor level within the commercial fringe area of the town centre.

Effect on the town centre conservation area It is anticipated that a change of use will not have any material effect on the character and appearance of the town centre conservation area.

Highway safety The Highway Authority believes that an objection to the development cannot be sustained on the grounds of danger to highway safety or capacity. Therefore, it is expected that the application will have no material effect on highway safety.

Crime and disorder It is suggested that the occupation of a vacant building and by bringing additional activity into the area the scheme could have a beneficial effect on crime and disorder.

- 19 -

Biodiversity No biodiversity issues have been identified.

Effect on neighbours The comments of the occupier of the premises below the application site are acknowledged.

It should be noted that the planning process regulates the use of land in the public interest and does not exist to protect the private interests of one person against the activities of another, although private interests may coincide with the public interest in some cases.

The public interest may require that the interests of individual occupiers to be considered and it can sometimes be difficult to distinguish between public and private interests, but this may be necessary on occasion. The basic question is not whether owners and occupiers of neighbouring properties would experience financial or other loss from a particular development, but whether the proposal would unacceptably affect amenities and the existing use of land and buildings which ought to be protected in the public interest.

It can be seen from the objector’s comments they do not as such relate to loss of amenity but to the possible disadvantageous effect on the commercial operation of the existing business and the possible resulting consequence on its viability.

The applicant has supplied additional information which sets out the intended times of operation of the church and it is clear that it would normally be in use on Sunday mornings and early afternoons and during the weekday evenings and not at times during normal business hours.

It is considered that to withhold planning permission, on the grounds of the possible damaging effect it could have on the business activities currently taking place on the ground floor of the building because of the potential effect it could have on its sensitive recording activities, is not seen as a robust enough reason to recommend the application for refusal.

Conclusion The proposal will bring back into use a range of offices that are currently vacant and despite the objection which has been received; it is considered that the application is acceptable.

RECOMMENDATION: Approve.

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

- 20 -

Reason: 1. Required to be imposed pursuant to S51 of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004.

BOROUGH COUNCIL OF WELLINGBOROUGH

Planning Committee 19/12/2012

Report of the Head of Planning and Local Development

APPLICATION REF: WP/2012/0392/F

PROPOSAL: New cricket training facility hall, along with a new cricket pavilion. Existing land around the development will be converted into 2 no. cricket playing pitches - amended plan and additional information.

LOCATION: Slype Farm, Easton Lane, Bozeat, Wellingborough. NN29 7NH

APPLICANT: Mr David Newton.

This application is referred to the Planning Committee for determination due to the serious concerns expressed by the Bozeat Parish Council.

PROPOSAL AND DESCRIPTION OF SITE: As described.

The application site is an existing barn located relatively close to a dwellinghouse located in the open countryside. The barn is set back from the road and there are hedgerows on the highway frontage.

An amended access plan was received on 7 October 2012 and Transport Statement was received on 27 November 2012 to address Northamptonshire County Council Highway Authority comments (19 September 2012).

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY: WR/1974/0007 Erection of new farmhouse – withdrawn BW/1987/0179 New vehicular access – conditionally approved BW/1987/0859 Dwellinghouse, garages, workshop and store – conditionally approved BW/1988/0553 Caravan used for temporary living accommodation (retrospective application) – refused WP/1999/0044 Open fronted hay/machinery barn – not determined WP/2001/0090 Detached bungalow and garages – refused WP/2004/0258 Entrance gates (up to 2.5m high) – conditionally approved WP/2012/0392/F

Planning & Local Development © Crown Copyright and database right 2012. Scale: Ordnance Survey 100018694. Legend This map is accurate 1:10,000 Cities Revealed to the scale specified Aerial Photography copyright: when reproduced at A4 ± GetMapping PLC 1999 WP/2012/0392/F - Slype Farm, Easton Lane, Bozeat - 22 -

WP/2010/0492 Change of use for former agricultural building together with extensions to form an indoor cricket bowling school – conditionally approved

NATIONAL GUIDANCE, DEVELOPMENT PLAN POLICY AND SUPPLEMENTARY PLANNING DOCUMENTS/GUIDANCE National Planning Policy Statement North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy (NNCSS): 1 (Strengthening the network of settlements) 6 (Infrastructure delivery and developer contributions) 8 (Delivering economic prosperity) 9 (Distribution and location of development) 11 (Distribution of jobs) 13 (General sustainable development principles) 14 (Energy efficiency and sustainable construction) Borough of Wellingborough Local Plan: G6 (Development within the open countryside) L2 (New small scale built community facilities) Supplementary Planning Documents: Northamptonshire Minerals and Waste Development Framework – Development and Implementation Strategy, Sustainable Design, Biodiversity Supplementary Planning Guidance: Parking, Planning Out Crime

SUMMARY OF REPLIES TO CONSULTATIONS/REPRESENTATIONS RECEIVED: 1. Bozeat Parish Council – originally offered the following comments -

“Superficially this proposal appears to be for a potentially valuable facility which could provide local employment and the Parish Council would not want to oppose it unnecessarily. We do however have some serious concerns but hope that they can be addressed by appropriate conditions.

We would first like to make some comments on the contents of the application:

1. The existing barn is not derelict and that the site is not a brownfield site. This proposal is for a development on a greenfield site in the open countryside. That said, this is a development that is unlikely to be accommodated elsewhere and so it should not be dismissed purely on this basis. 2. This proposal neither preserves nor enhances the character of the area as claimed. 3. Whilst it is true that bus routes W8 and 43 bus serve Bozeat, the last bus to the village arrives at 19:02 (W8 from Wellingborough) and the last bus that leaves the village at 18:30 (43 terminating at Wollaston). Given the projected hours of use in this proposal, this means that there are no viable bus services for users of this facility. We are concerned that the single track access (albeit widened for a short distance at the entrance) could cause vehicles to back up onto the road while waiting for a vehicle to exit the site. We would suggest that the track is widened throughout its length to allow vehicles to pass. At the very least, the length of widened track at the entrance should be such that it can accommodate sufficient vehicles to prevent queuing on the road.

Although not a major route, this road is a popular route because it provides the most direct route from the village to Northampton. The Community Speedwatch - 23 -

figures showed that this road is popular as a commuter route and so cannot be considered a quiet road.

We would suggest that the parking, the access track and the access routes are not suitable to hold county cricket matches as proposed in the application. To reach the site traffic would either have to travel through the centre of Bozeat (from the A509) or come through other villages on routes off the A45 or A428. We seriously doubt that any of these routes are capable of handling the traffic flows that would be involved. We suggest a condition that restricts the number of attendees allowed to attend events at the site either in terms of absolute numbers or by prohibiting the use of the site for county level matches.

We are further concerned about the impact of any exterior lighting. In addition to the prospect of adding to general light pollution, there are concerns about the effects on the nearby residential properties and possibly glare for traffic on the adjacent roads. Should planning permission be granted, we would recommend a condition restricting lighting to low-level lighting.

Our final concern is that of safety both for drivers on the A509 and for walkers on the footpaths that pass by the cricket pitches. We note that the Ramblers have also raised concerns and we agree that a safety assessment should be carried out and protective open fencing (e.g. chain link) erected if is considered necessary.”

2. Easton Maudit Parish Meeting - no objection.

3. Ramblers Association –

“Since my earlier comments dated 5 September I note NCC have indicated they consider the request for a risk assessment may be discounted whilst the Parish Council support the suggestion.

I note also that in Para. 9.3 of the Conclusions section to the Traffic Assessment it is stated, inter alia, there are no footpaths adjoining the site. This is incorrect. I assume the author of this report is referring only to the lack of footpath(s) alongside the road. As pointed out footpath Bozeat TA17, which in law is of course a public highway, does adjoin the site.

I am fully aware that there are numerous locations where cricket pitches and nearby footpaths, houses, roads etc etc etc co-exist but I would argue that these situations are historic and that if new pitch(es) are planned then full account should be taken of possible risks, unlikely though these may seem.

I find it troubling that despite the concerns expressed the existence of Footpath TA17 has still yet to be even acknowledged in the supporting documentation for this Application, let alone proper consideration being given to the possible risks of people using it.

I therefore continue to request that a risk/safety assessment by someone qualified to do it should be carried out.” - 24 -

4. Northamptonshire County Council Highway Authority (19 September 2012) –

“The response of the Ramblers Association in respect of the potential dangers of a cricket ball being struck so as to endanger persons using Public Footpath TA17 is noted. Whilst a risk assessment has been suggested it is considered that this may be such an unlikely event as to be discounted.”

5. Northamptonshire Police Crime Prevention Design Advisor – has no formal objection but suggests a number of crime prevention informatives be attached to any permission.

6. Borough Council of Wellingborough Landscape Officer – no comment received.

7. Borough Council of Wellingborough Sport Development Officer – no comment received.

8. Sport England – no comment received.

9. Anglian Water Services Limited –

“I refer to the planning application WP/2012/0392 and its proximity to Bozeat Sewage Treatment Works. In view of the nature of the development and its distance from the active processes at Bozeat STW Anglian Water would not consider there to be a significant risk of odour nuisance resulting from the normal operation of this STW.”

10. Neighbours/Third Parties – no comment received.

11. The applicant has confirmed that no first class county matches will be played on the ground. However, there is a possibility that County Second XI and Youth cricket fixtures could be played.

With regards to the comments submitted from the Ramblers Association, the applicant has robustly disagreed with the suggested need for a risk assessment for the following reasons:

• needless expense in undertaking the assessment • position of the footpath which is 20m away from the boundary with mature planting and a brook in-between. There will not be any international games played at the ground in which these players could be capable of striking the ball such distances • reference to other cricket grounds in the county, some of which are relatively new, where cricket matches, users of footpaths and residents happily co-exist • proposal would be used by the whole community, however, the outdoor element of the scheme would only be used for part of the year • applicant is not a professional risk or footpath assessor, but has common sense and hopes that the correct decision will be made on this issue.

- 25 -

12. Northamptonshire County Council Highway Authority (4 December 2012)

“The exchange on this subject is noted and, as the local highway authority has responsibilities in respect of the right of way, a response is appropriate.

In my earlier CR2 response of 19 September 2012 I suggested that, as the event of a user of the Public Footpath being struck by a cricket ball was unlikely, the risk might be discounted.

However, it could occur and, to indicate that the eventuality has been considered, you may consider it appropriate to obtain a statement from the applicant – possibly containing some of the arguments put forward by Mr Surti – of the risk presented by the proposed activities.”

ASSESSMENT: The material planning considerations are:

• Compliance with policy • Highway safety • Effect on the visual amenity of the countryside • Biodiversity • Crime and disorder • Effect on the Upper Nene Valley Special Protection Area

Compliance with policy The NNCSS contains a suite of policies that could have an influence on the determination of the proposals. The policies are generally aimed at trying to steer proposed development in the rural areas towards villages that perform a sustainable local service centre role. The most specific policy is considered to be 11 (g) which states that ‘within the rural areas, new employment development will be directed to the rural and local service centres’. The conversion of existing buildings and infrastructure for employment and tourism related development will be encouraged in locations within and adjoining settlements. In order to support farm diversification in the open countryside, conversion to employment uses of buildings worthy of retention will be supported where proposals are in accordance with the criteria set out in Policy 13.

Saved local plan Policy G6 sets out a number of criteria which development in the open countryside should meet to be acceptable in terms of planning policy. In brief they relate to:

• development not capable of being accommodated elsewhere • limited number of buildings/structures that are small in scale • landscaping to minimise visual impact • not result in a proliferation of new buildings • if intended to principally serve the town it should be located close to the urban development • will not result in the coalescence of Wellingborough and Northampton

- 26 -

In relation to the restrictive G6 criteria mentioned above, the following issues should be considered.

It is possible that the ‘indoor’ element of the proposed development could be accommodated in an established industrial estate within the town or in one of the larger villages within the borough. However, there could be planning policy issues with an intended change away from an employment use; and in addition, the Borough Council of Wellingborough erstwhile Sports Development Officer previously opined with regards to the originally approved application that running a cricket facility from an industrial unit would no be financially viable.

The Parish Council has commented that the development neither preserves nor enhances the character of the area. It is considered that the size and design of the building would be commensurate with its use and the intended exterior facing material would also have to be submitted for prior approval. Cricket pitches are by their nature open areas of land and it is anticipated that they will not be harmful to the charterer or appearance of the open countryside; landscape planting would assist the development to visually integrate with its rural setting.

A condition is suggested which would require the submission for approval of details of any intended exterior lighting to prevent light pollution and harm to the visual amenity of the area.

Open fencing (e.g. chain link) as suggested by the Parish Council, could, depending on its height, colour and design, have a detrimental effect on the visual amenity of the open countryside.

Policy L2 of the local plan is states that proposals for small-scale built community facilities will be granted planning permission in a village provided the site lies within it or on its edge and the facilities are designed primarily to meet that village's needs. The explanatory text to the policy goes on to say that it is intended to encourage the provision of new small scale community facilities in the existing built-up areas of the villages, provided the proposals meet the requirements of the defunct Policy G1.

Facilities should be limited to a size appropriate to service provision in the immediate vicinity, as wider catchments would be likely to create undue local environmental and traffic nuisance.

With regards to Policy L2 it suggested that it is the case the proposed development is of a size which is appropriate for its intended use. It is accepted it is perhaps also the case that the development would serve a wider catchment area than just the village of Bozeat and the site is not located within or on the edge of Bozeat. It is considered, however, that the proposal site is not situated close to any other property and is therefore unlikely to result in any undue local environmental problems.

Paragraph 70 of the National Planning Policy Framework says that to deliver recreational facilities planning decisions plan positively for the provision and use of sports venues. Paragraph 73 goes on to promote the opportunity for sport in making an important contribution to the health and well-being of communities.

- 27 -

Paragraph 75 of the National Planning Policy Framework also makes reference to protecting and enhancing public rights of way and access.

The former Council’s Sports Development Officer previously thought that there is an identified need for this type of sporting facility in the borough and clearly the residents of Bozeat will be well placed to use it. The erstwhile Sports Development Officer also stated that viability has seemingly been an issue previously with cricket facilities, despite the number and recognised quality of the local clubs that provide a variety of teams suitable for all ages, standards and for both genders.

It is considered, from a policy viewpoint, more weight should be accorded to the policies contained within the National Planning Policy Framework and the previously identified need to provide this sort of facility in the borough than the more dated restrictive saved local plan open countryside policies. This would give the opportunity for wider and more regular participation in the sport which could underpin the success of local clubs in providing cricket, with all the associated benefits that taking part in sport brings about.

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

The comments of the Parish Council regarding the local bus service not being capable of serving the proposed development are noted, and it is accepted that the proposal site is remote from local service centres. However, it is the case that many clubs in the borough are closer to the application site than say the indoor facility at the County Ground in Northampton and the application site could, therefore, be a more sustainable travel option for many cricketers in the borough of Wellingborough. With regard to public transport, interestingly the empirical evidence at the NCCC centre is that virtually all the players who practice there arrive by car, even in its sustainable location close to the Wellingborough Road bus stops.

The other comments of the Parish Council regarding matters of traffic routes and flows and highway safety are acknowledged, but significantly, the Northamptonshire County Council Highway Authority has not objected to the proposal.

The comments regarding users of the Public Right of Way in the vicinity being put in danger by an extremely well struck cricket ball are also acknowledged. As originally stated by the Northamptonshire County Council Highway Authority, this would be an unlikely event, especially given the distances involved and the standard of players who would be using the ground. In any event, it is anticipated that the owner of the ground would have some form of public liability insurance to cover such an improbable incident.

Biodiversity Policy 13 (o) of the North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy states that development should conserve and enhance biodiversity.

- 28 -

Landscaping would include indigenous species of plants which would be of benefit to native wildlife by providing both food and habitat.

Crime and disorder Policy 13 (b) of the North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy states that development should seek to design out antisocial behaviour, crime and reduce the fear of crime by applying the principles of the Secured by Design scheme.

The Police have no objection to the scheme. It is suggested that an informative can be included on any planning permission to convey the advice from the Police regarding suitable crime prevention measures.

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

Conclusion It is considered that there are no sustainable reasons to justify refusal of the application.

RECOMMENDATION: Approve with conditions.

1. The development shall be begun not later than the expiration of three years beginning with the date of this permission. 2. Before the development is commenced representative samples of all new external facing and roofing materials shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The development shall be carried out using the approved materials. 3. Before development is commenced a landscape scheme shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The scheme shall be implemented concurrently with the development and shall be completed not later than the first planting season following the substantial completion of the development. Any trees and shrubs removed, dying, being severely damaged or becoming seriously diseased within five years of planting shall be replaced by trees and shrubs of similar size and species to those originally required to be planted or other species as may be agreed. 4. The access improvement works illustrated on SF:PA02/02 shall be completed before the development is first brought into use. 5. The areas shown for parking and turning on the approved plans shall be laid out and surfaced to the satisfaction of the local planning authority before the approved development is first brought into use and shall be permanently set aside and reserved for the purpose. 6. The hereby permitted use shall not be carried out at any time other than for purposes ancillary to the dwelling known as Slype Farm. 7. The premises shall be used for a sports hall and for no other purpose (including any other purpose in Class D2 of the Schedule to the Town and Country Planning (Use Classes) Order 1987, or in any provision equivalent to that Class in any statutory instrument revoking and re-enacting that Order with or without modification). - 29 -

8. Details of all exterior lighting associated with the development shall be submitted to the local planning authority for approval in writing. The exterior lighting shall be installed in accord with the approved details.

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 visual amenity and biodiversity. 4. In the interests of highway safety. 5. In the interests of the safety and convenience of users of the adjoining highway. 6. In the interests of preventing the development resorting to a separate planning unit. 7. To prevent the use of the building reverting to another use within the same use class which may be inappropriate in the open countryside. 8. In the interests of preventing light pollution and protecting visual amenity.

INFORMATIVES 1. Pursuant to Section 38 (6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004, the proposed development complies with the applicable development plan policies and there are no other material considerations that would constitute sustainable grounds for refusal. These include specifically the following policies: North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy (NNCSS): 1 (Strengthening the network of settlements) 6 (Infrastructure delivery and developer contributions) 8 (Delivering economic prosperity) 9 (Distribution and location of development) 11 (Distribution of jobs) 12 (Distribution of retail development) 13 (General sustainable development principles) 14 (Energy efficiency and sustainable construction) Borough of Wellingborough Local Plan: G6 (Development within the open countryside) L2 (New small scale built community facilities). In accordance with the provisions in the Town and Country Planning (Development Management Procedure) (England) (Amendment No. 2) Order 2012 and pursuant to paragraphs 186 and 187 of the National Planning Policy Framework, where possible and feasible, either through discussions, negotiations or in the consideration and assessment of this application and the accompanying proposals, the Council as the local planning authority endeavoured to work with the applicant/developer in a positive and proactive way to ensure that the approved development is consistent with the relevant provisions in The Framework.

2. Crime Prevention

Windows should meet BS7950 or equivalent with single panes of laminated glazing to a minimum of 6.4mm thickness

All external doors to conform to PAS23/PAS24 or LPS1175 SR2 as a minimum

Internal doors to vulnerable areas including kitchen, bar, office and equipment storage room are fitted with doors to PAS23/24 - 30 -

A lockable enclosure is provided for waste bins that is located away from the fabric of the building to reduce the impact of arson

The groundsman 'out shed' door should be fitted with locks to BS3621 with ground anchors to Sold Secure Silver standard to enable equipment to be secured

Lighting suitable for a rural location should be provided to illuminate all external doors, entrances and parking areas with lighting levels and uniformity in compliance with SBD

If cycle parking is also to be incorporated then secure points that enable the frame and both wheels to be locked using a single security locking device should be provided

Any existing CCTV or security alarm provision on site is extended to include this development.

3. The applicant is advised that this decision relates to the following drawing numbers received on the dates shown: Drawing Numbers: Date Received: SF:PA01/01, SF:PA01/03 and SF:PA01/04 29 August 2012 SF:PA02/02 7 October 2012

4. Highways The applicant is advised that planning permission does not automatically allow the construction of the vehicle crossing, details of which require the approval of the Highway Authority. In this regard you should contact the Team Leader Regulations, Sustainable Transport, Riverside House, Riverside Way, Northampton NN1 5NX prior to any construction/excavation works within the public highway.

- 31 -

BOROUGH COUNCIL OF WELLINGBOROUGH

Planning Committee 19/12/2012

Report of the Head of Planning and Local Development

APPLICATION REF: WP/2012/0416/OM

PROPOSAL: Change of use and development of a crematorium and woodland burial site with associated parking, access and landscaping including memorial gardens for the scattering of ashes (amended description) - amendments received 28 and 29/11/12.

LOCATION: Land east of Doddington Road, Doddington Road, Wellingborough.

APPLICANT: Mercia Crematoria Developments Limited.

PROPOSAL AND DESCRIPTION OF SITE: This site which extends to just over 4 hectares lies on the southern edge of Wellingborough outside the limits to development in an area where open countryside policies apply. It is currently in agricultural use (arable). Although it slopes quite steeply from west to east it is open in character with few if any features. There are no public rights of way across the site.

Doddington Road (B753) forms the site’s north western boundary demarcated by a hedgerow beyond this is The Miller restaurant/public house and garden centre. To the east lies Wellingborough Prison which is due to close by the end of 2012 although the future plans for the prison site are unknown at present. To the north is Millers Park, prison staff housing whilst to the south is open countryside leading down to the River Nene.

An 11kv overhead electricity line crosses the site from north to south and an underground mains water pipe from east to west.

This application seeks to establish the principle of a crematoria development and whilst full approval is sought for the means of access all other matters are reserved for future approval. The applicant has however submitted a Design and Access statement to explain the philosophy behind their proposals along with indicative details and examples of developments constructed elsewhere.

The majority of the site will be landscaped with formal memorial gardens perhaps incorporating a water feature, flowerbeds, benches, wildflower meadow and woodland burial area. The woodland burial area will be restricted to the burial of ashes. The DOD DINGTON ROAD DINGTON DOD

JOHN LEA WAY

WP/2012/0416/OM6

14 TURNELLS MILL LANE 2 to 4 to 2

11 64.3m

12 9

19 to 29 24

14 13 70 16

7 WILCE AVENUE 4 ESS 1

2 to 16 to 2 2 22

SPEN CER R OAD

105 36 A 45

80 30

60 38

111 54

115

117 62

60.0m

90 42 Gas Govn 68

172 52

173 46

165 164

158

150 12 G

MILLER S PARK 156

13 60

11 29

52 31 G

21 39

MILLER S PARK

44 45 A

The Merry Miller (Inn)

HM Prison Wellingborough

Gas Compound Pond

MILLER S LANE

DOD DINGTON ROAD

Pond

ED and Ward Bdy

1.22m R H

Def ED & Ward Bdy Oak

Oaks

Def ED an d Ward Bdy

Planning & Local Development © Crown Copyright and database right 2012. Scale: Ordnance Survey 100018694. Legend This map is accurate 1:3,000 Cities Revealed to the scale specified Aerial Photography copyright: when reproduced at A4 WP/2012/0416/OM - Land east of Doddington Road, Doddington Road, Wellingborough ± GetMapping PLC 1999 - 32 - applicant has suggested a crematorium building of up to a maximum of 999 sq m but envisage a building of up to 700 sq m would be more likely. It is intended that the building will accommodate a chapel which will face east to maximise the views across the valley, waiting area, a single crematory, porte cochere, flower court and book room. Two parking areas have been suggested totalling 100 spaces, one serving the crematorium and the other for visitors to the memorial gardens.

The siting of the proposed building will be dictated by the 1902 Crematorium Act which states that a new crematorium building must be 200 yards from any residential dwelling and 50 yards from any public right of way. The existence of the overhead power cables, underground water main and site topography have also influenced the siting of the building towards an unrestricted area along the southern site boundary.

It should be noted that the 1902 Crematorium Act does not restrict the building of house adjacent to existing crematoria and as such there are not considered to be any adverse implications for the potential redevelopment of the prison site.

The Design and Access statement states that the dominant feature of the building will the chapel and not the chimney. A single storey height building is envisaged with a high (vaulted or otherwise) ceiling creating a light and airy ambience together with large areas of glazing to optimise natural daylight and maximising the views over the valley. Whilst the statement sets out general design principles and provides visual examples of facilities developed by the applicant elsewhere the eventual site layout, siting, design and landscaping of the development will be influenced by the requirements of the operator of the facility who has yet to be identified. Two design approaches are identified either a modern, expensive appearance or a traditional rural appearance.

Given the topography of the site it is envisaged that significant cut and fill will be required to provide a level plateau for the building and to enable Disability Discrimination Act compliant pedestrian and vehicular routes across the site. Indicative details submitted by the applicant show the building nestling into the sites sloping topography.

In terms of the operation of the facility the applicant suggests hours of opening of 9am – 5pm Monday to Friday plus occasional Saturday 9am – 1pm use. They predicted 1,100 cremation services per year (breaking down to 21 per week or 4 per day on average although demand is subject to seasonal peaks) with an anticipated 20 cars to each service. When staff (2 full time and two part time) and visitors to memorials are included the estimated traffic generation is in the order of 100 vehicles per day.

The new facility is expected to be established by 2015.

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY: No site history.

NATIONAL GUIDANCE, DEVELOPMENT PLAN POLICY AND SUPPLEMENTARY PLANNING DOCUMENTS/GUIDANCE: National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy Policy 9 Distribution and location of development - 33 -

Policy 5 Green Infrastructure Policy 13 General Sustainable Development Principles Borough of Wellingborough Local Plan Policy G6 Open Countryside

SUMMARY OF REPLIES TO CONSULTATIONS/REPRESENTATIONS RECEIVED: 1. Natural England –

• The proposal does not appear to affect any statutorily protected sites or landscapes or have significant impacts on the conservation of soils, nor is the proposal EIA development. • It is within an area that could benefit from enhanced green infrastructure (GI) provision. Which Natural England would encourage the incorporation of GI in this development. • English Nature have adopted standing advice for protected species • The protected species survey has identified great crested newts may be affected by this development • English Nature has not assessed the survey for badgers, barn owls and breeding birds, water voles reptiles or white clawed crayfish.

2. Northamptonshire County Council, Highways -

• Vehicular access into the site is to be 5.5m wide for a distance of 15m from the edge of the carriageway • Vehicular crossing must be constructed and all high way surfaces affected reinstated in accordance with the specification of NCC and subject to a suitable licence/agreement under the Highway Act 1980. • Vehicle to vehicle visibility of 2.4m x 120m must be provided and maintained in both directions at the junction of the means of access with Doddington Road. • To provide pedestrian continuity it is appropriate for a footway 1.8m wide to be provided between the access and the existing footway provision to the north. Works are to include the upgrading of the remainder of the footway and provision of informal pedestrian crossing points. • Given the location of the site immediately to the south of the A45 junction a more detailed indication of the number and frequency of trips on the local road network is required to include likely opening hours, number of funerals per day and maximum number of mourners at each ceremony. • The application should be referred to the Highways Agency. • Further information has been provided by the applicant and Highways now consider the arrangements satisfactory.

3. Highways Agency –

• No response to date.

4. Environment Agency –

• Object to the grant of planning permission and recommend refusal. - 34 -

• The application does not comply with the requirements set out in paragraph 9 of the Technical Guide to the National Planning Policy Framework and as such the FRA does not provide a suitable basis for assessment to be made of the flood risk arising from the proposed development. • The submitted FRA fails to demonstrate that any surface water scheme is achievable on site and can be managed. • Fails to demonstrate that post development run-off does not exceed pre development run-off. • Fails to provide a sustainable drainage strategy • Following negotiations with the Applicant the EA have withdrawn their recommendation to refuse this application and have recommendation additional planning conditions.

5. 2 third party objections –

• going to cause more congestion onto an already busy road • dangerous to have an entrance to anything on the bend on Doddington Road • would be an eyesore to many people overlooking the proposed site as they have beautiful views of the valley • feel there is a need for a crematorium but not a private one, it should be Council built and run in a more appropriate place. • Too close to houses

6. Northamptonshire County Council, Archaeology –

• It is recommended that further information in the form of an archaeological field evaluation is provided before the determination of this application. • A complex of crop marks thought to represent prehistoric settlement exists to the south west of the application site. • To the west, a pipeline trench in the 1960’s revealed part of a limestone wall in association with Romano-British pottery, a subsequent pipeline trench to the south cut through 5 ditches all of which produced Romano- British pottery • To the south east, Saxon pottery has been found during field walking and there is thought to be a small settlement associated with the finds. • Clearly the site has considerable archaeological potential but no information has been supplied which would allow the impact on any such remains to be assessed

NB an archaeological geophysical survey has since been undertaken and trial trenching carried out on site the results/findings of this work have been submitted to the County Archaeologist whose further comments are awaited

7. 4 letters of support –

• An ideal location accessible by public transport but on the outskirts of town, providing both peaceful and beautiful views for all visitors. • Currently use the facilities at Northampton, Kettering and Peterborough but because of the volume of cremations it is not always possible to obtain a booking time to suit the family of the deceased. - 35 -

• Time slots available have the effect of making the service feel as though it is on a ‘conveyor belt’ which is unacceptable to Clients • Have been advised the new crematorium will offer 45 minute slots which can only have a positive impact on the experience of the bereaved • There is a clear need of the expansion of facilities in the area to meet the needs of the bereaved

8. Kettering Borough Council –

• Object • The references made to the operation at Kettering Crematorium in the Statement of Need make incorrect assumptions and are fundamentally flawed. The manner in which the information has been provided would mislead anyone making a decision in this application. • The calculations for chapel use in the Statement of Need document do not reflect the reality of current operational activity at Kettering. • Kettering Crematorium is currently working at two thirds of its annual capacity. Even in its busiest winter months all available service times have not been used • Kettering Crematorium could within its current operations, handle a significantly increased demand for cremations within its current capacity which would be well within the projected growth rates of the area it serves. • It has to be assumed that the calculations for the other crematoria are also not accurately reflected in the document. • Whilst the current facilities are adequate to meet current demand, Kettering Crematorium is aware that its current equipment and facilities need to be improved to meet projected future demand. A significant improvement programme is therefore about to commence which will see equipment and facilities upgraded to meet those demands for the foreseeable future. • The in built option to introduce a further cremator, should growth indicate the need, future proofs the service for the foreseeable future. This ignores the other option of changing working patterns to further benefit from the capacity of the new cremators, which would be a possibility if the need arose. • Kettering Crematorium is aware that it serves populations beyond the Borough of Kettering and that some have travelled to use those services. The transport infrastructure improvements around Kettering and between Kettering and Wellingborough should ensure that travel times remain at a minimum for the bereaved to use Kettering Crematorium • The application is directly at odds with the core principles of the NPPF in that the unsubstantiated need for this proposal will impede sustainable economic growth with regard to the existing and planned crematorium services for Kettering. • In view of all of the above this planning application should be refused.

9. Ministry of Justice –

• Have reviewed the planning proposal and do not have any current concerns to note. Therefore we do not object in principle to the application - 36 -

• Aware that this is an outline application and reserved matters specifying detailed design, layout and landscaping have not been submitted. We look forward to receiving these when submitted so that we may make further comment.

10. Borough of Wellingborough Council, Environmental Protection Service –

• Air Quality Assessment required, without one unable to determine the impacts that the pollutants emitted would have on nearby properties • In particular the impact of the additional emissions permitted by the EPR regime will have on the current air quality in the area will need to be assessed for their significance and the potential to breach national air quality standards which could lead to Council to have to declare an Air Quality Management Area. • Also the permitted levels of other pollutants would need to be assessed at receptor points

NB an air quality assessment has since been commissioned by the applicant the findings of which will be available before Committee.

11. Great Doddington Parish Council - • The Parish Council has been afforded a presentation by the applicants of the proposed crematorium and has major concerns over the impact of additional traffic passing through the village as a result of this development.

12. Borough of Wellingborough Council, Landscape Officer –

• The site has a lot to commend it for this use with the south facing views over the Nene Valley • Because it is arable farmland at present there is scope for improving its value for wildlife • A great deal more landscape detail needs to be provided. This includes the implications of the cut and fill required to set the building into the hillside and accommodate on-site run off. • The possibility of a green roof is mentioned in the Design and Access statement, this would help reduce the visual impact of the building in the landscape. • The site is to accommodate a more formal garden and a woodland and wildflower meadow area, the success of these contrasting approaches depend upon appropriate management and visitors understanding. • The woodland area may be woodland with ground flora or more likely parkland with wider spaced trees. • A wildflower meadow will loose its potential biodiversity value if it becomes over time maintained with frequent mowing and visitors do not understand that it is not intended to be tidy.

ASSESSMENT: • compliance with policy • Issue of need/site selection - 37 -

• Effect on neighbours residential amenity • Effect on character of the area • Highway safety • Crime and disorder

Compliance with Policy The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) was published on the 27th March 2012 and sets out the Government’s planning policies for England. The NPPF is a material consideration in planning decisions. At the heart of the NPPF is a presumption in favour of sustainable development.

Aspects of the NPPF of particular relevance to crematoria are :

• Development is required to be of good design (paras 56-68) • Planning policies and decisions should plan positively for the provision of community facilities, cultural buildings and other local services (para 70) • Inappropriate development in areas at risk of flooding should be avoided by directing the development away from areas at highest risk (para 100-104) • The planning system should conserve and enhance the natural environment (para 109-119)

The Development Plan for the area currently comprises the North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy and saved policies of the Borough of Wellingborough Local Plan.

Policies 9, 5 and 13 of the North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy are also considered pertinent to the determination of this application.

Policy 9: Distribution and location of development together with Policy 1 focuses development on the settlements and directs that new development in the open countryside will be strictly controlled.

Policy 5: Green Infrastructure seeks a net gain in green infrastructure through the protection of existing assets and the creation of new multi functional areas of green space

Policy 13: General Sustainable Development Principles sets out the basic requirements for all development to meet community needs, raise the standards

The application also needs to be assessed against Policy G6 Open Countryside of the Borough of Wellingborough Local Plan this policy seeks to restrict development in the open countryside to that which has a need to be there and seeks to ensure it has minimal impact

The policies in the Development Plan seek to restrict development in the open countryside unless it has a genuine need to be there. Due to the nature of the use the requirements of the Crematorium Act (1902) and the Department of the Environment publication ‘The Siting and Planning of Crematoria’ (1978) it is considered that a crematorium would represent a use which could be treated as an acceptable use in the open countryside.

- 38 -

The development does however need to be carefully sited and designed so as to minimise intrusion into the countryside and therefore a high quality of design should be sought. Policy 13 of the NNCSS sets out general sustainable development principles which should be applied to any proposal for reserved matters.

It is accepted that this is a use which cannot reasonably be located within an existing settlement and as such, accords with policy

Issue of need/site selection As mentioned above the site is located in open countryside where new development is strictly controlled. In support of their application the applicant has produced a Statement of Need and undertaken a site search.

Existing crematoria are located at Kettering, Northampton and Bedford, in assessing the need for an additional facility at Wellingborough the applicant has used the guidance contained within ‘The Charter for the Bereaved’ (2012) produced by the Institute of Cemetery and Crematorium Management.

The report looks at the true capacity of existing facilities, death rates, population figures/forecasts and major planned housing growth across North Northants.

Kettering Borough Council consider the references made to the operation of Kettering Crematorium in the Statement of Need to be fundamentally flawed as they make incorrect assumptions. They also consider the manner in which the information has been provided would mislead anyone making a decision in this application. They maintain that there is capacity at Kettering crematorium to meet existing demand and with planned improvements future demand

It is not intended to go into the need assessment in detail as the Council have commissioned an independent needs assessment which concurs that there is a need for a new crematorium at Wellingborough.

As the purpose of the crematorium is to predominantly serve the Borough of Wellingborough a location on the periphery of the town was sought. Eight site selection criteria were identified:

• legal constraints to development (including the 1902 Cremation Act), • topography • visual impact • flooding • setting • site access • accessibility by public transport (including pedestrians) • availability

20 sites were put forward for consideration after meeting the basic requirements of size and road frontage. 9 sites were discounted as either being within the northern or eastern development areas. 2 were discounted as having future commercial/residential hope value, 2 had inappropriate vehicular access, 2 did not comply with the - 39 -

requirements of the 1902 Crematorium Act, 1 was liable to flooding and 2 had inappropriate neighbouring uses.

2 sites were considered appropriate, the application site was selected as it connected to residential areas by public footpath, better located to local services and facilities, better related to the town being a true edge of settlement was viable and available in the required timeframe. It also scored most highly on setting through the views over the River Nene Valley.

Both the applicants and the Council’s independent need assessments conclude that there is a need for a crematorium at Wellingborough and in planning terms the application site is considered acceptable. On this basis the

Effect on neighbours residential amenities and the character of the area Policy 13 of the North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy (NNCSS) and the SPD on Sustainable Design require new development to be of a high standard of design, respect and enhance the character of its surroundings, and not result in an unacceptable impact upon the amenities of neighbouring properties or wider area; by reason of noise, loss of light or overlooking. The NPPF echoes the above policies by stating that development should contribute positively to making places better for people.

The proposed development is located within open countryside where development will be strictly controlled however a need for this facility has been established and as such it is also accepted that a crematorium is an acceptable use in such a location as it cannot easily be located within an existing settlement.

The application is in outline form with all matters, except means of access, reserved for future approval. The design philosophy contained within the amended Design and Access statement is considered to give sufficient comfort that a development can be achieved which does not have a detrimental effect on the residential amenities of neighbours or have an adverse effect on the character of the area.

As such the proposed development is considered to be in compliance with Policy 13 of the NNCSS.

Highway safety Whilst this application is in outline form full approval is sought for the proposed means of access. A satisfactory means of access can be achieved on land within the applicants control or highway land.

Northamptonshire County Council did have some concerns regarding the proposed development based upon the information originally submitted. and the proximity of the crematorium to the A45 junction. The applicant has since provided additional information on the number and frequency of trips on the local road network including likely opening hours, number of funerals per day and maximum number of mourners at each ceremony. This additional information has satisfied the concerns of Highways.

No consultation response has been received to date from the Highways Agency.

- 40 -

Two third party objections have been received to the application both of which raise concerns that the development will create additional congestion on an already busy road and consider it dangerous to have an entrance to anything on the bend on Doddington Road. In addition Great Doddington Parish Council raise major concerns over the impact of additional traffic passing through the village as a result of the development.

However in the absence of any objection to the development from either Northamptonshire County Council Highways or the Highways Agency it is difficult to give material weight to these objections

The applicant anticipates the crematorium will result in an additional 100 vehicles per day using the public highway between the hours of 9am – 5pm with a maximum of 20 vehicles attending a service. Even if this figure were to double it is not considered that it would compromise the capacity of the highway network.

On balance the proposed development is considered acceptable on highway safety grounds.

RECOMMENDATION: Approve with conditions.

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 three 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 layout, scale, external appearance 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. The approved landscaping 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. 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. 5. Provision shall be made for the parking, turning, loading and unloading of vehicles within the site, in accordance with a plan which shall be submitted to and approved by the local planning authority before the development is commenced. The areas so provided shall be laid out and surfaced to the - 41 -

satisfaction of the local planning authority before the premises are occupied and shall be permanently set aside and reserved for the purpose. 6. The approved access shall be 5.5m wide for a distance of 15m from the edge of the carriageway. Vehicle to vehicle visibility of 2.4m x 120m shall be provided and maintained in both directions. In addition a 1.8m wide footpath shall be provided from the new access and joining into the existing public footpath to the north. 7. Prior to the submission of a Reserved Matters application for layout or landscaping, a detailed scheme for surface water drainage based on sustainable drainage principles and an assessment of the hydrological and hydro geological context of the development, must be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The scheme shall subsequently be implemented in accordance with the approved details before the development is occupied. The scheme shall also include the implementation, ownership and maintenance of the surface water drainage for the site. 8. The development hereby permitted shall not be commenced until such time as a scheme to dispose of foul drainage has been submitted to, and approved in writing, by the local planning authority. The scheme shall be implemented as approved 9. The development hereby permitted shall not be commenced until such time as a scheme to install oil and petrol separators has been submitted to and approved in writing, by the local planning authority. The scheme shall be implemented as approved.

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. In the interests of visual amenity. 4. In the interests of amenity. 5. In the interests of the safety and convenience of users of the adjoining highway/s. 6. In the interests of highway safety. 7. To prevent increased risk of flooding, both on and off site. 8. To prevent the pollution of the water environment 9. To prevent the pollution of the water environment.

INFORMATIVE/S 1. Pursuant to Section 38 (6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004, the proposed development complies with the applicable development plan policies and there are no other material considerations that would constitute sustainable grounds for refusal. These include specifically the following policies: Policies 5, 9 and 13 of the North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy and Policy G6 of the Borough of Wellingborough Local Plan 2. The applicant is advised that this decision relates to the following drawing numbers received on the dates shown: Drawing Number: Date Received: 12_097 04B 12th September 2012 12037/D05 21st September 2012 - 42 -

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 Team Leader Regulations, Sustainable Transport, Riverside House, Riverside Way, Northampton NN1 5NX prior to any construction/excavation works within the public highway. 4. The applicants attention is drawn to the advice contained within the Environment Agency's letter of the 30th November 2012 a copy of which is attached to this consent. - 43 -

BOROUGH COUNCIL OF WELLINGBOROUGH

Planning Committee 19/12/2012

Report of the Head of Planning and Local Development

APPLICATION REF: WP/2012/0458/DOC

PROPOSAL: Details of Design Codes pursuant to conditions 5 and 6 of the Secretary of State's decision dated 23/02/2010 (Council Ref: WP/2008/0150/OEIA) to grant outline permission for up to 3000 dwellings, retail and commercial facilities, non- residential and educational institutions, open spaces and parklands, employment and related infrastructure - amended document.

LOCATION: Land off the A509 Niort Way and A510 Northen Way and south of Great Harrowden, Wellingborough.

APPLICANT: Mr Mark Best, Northants LLP

BACKGROUND: Upper Redhill is a major Sustainable Urban Extension (SUE) to Wellingborough, comprising 3,000 new dwellings and associated facilities, infrastructure and open space. Following a lengthy public inquiry, the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government considered the Inspector’s report and granted outline approval on 23 February 2010 – Council Ref: WP/2008/0150/OEIA

Condition 5 of the outline consent requires a design code for each phase of development to be approved by the local planning authority prior to the submission of reserved matters applications. It states that:

No reserved matters application shall be submitted for development in relation to any phase of development unless a design code (including schedules of external facing materials for all buildings) covering that application has been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. Such design code to be submitted to the local planning authority for approval shall consist of guidance and coding relating to the following matters for that application:

• character areas overview; • public realm strategy; • movement network including route hierarchy; • street, building and block typologies; • open spaces and landscape; WP/2012/0458/DOC

Planning & Local Development © Crown Copyright and database right 2012. Legend Scale: Ordnance Survey 100018694. This map is accurate 1:16,000 Cities Revealed WP/2012/0458/DOC - Land off the A509 Niort Way & A510 Northern Way & South of Great Harrowden to the scale specified Aerial Photography copyright: when reproduced at A4 ± GetMapping PLC 1999 - 44 -

• environmental standards; and • implementation.

The development shall thereafter be implemented in accordance with the approved design code details.

The design code before the Committee is for Phase 1 of the scheme (phases 2 and 3 will come forward independently of phase 1). Phase 1 covers the area between the A509 and the proposed Isham to Wellingborough Improvement Road (IWImp) in addition to designated green infrastructure in phase 2, to the west of IWImp. The requirements of Condition 5 are addressed in the following parts of the code: The consent allows the following development to be delivered in Phase 1:

• 1500 homes • a new primary school • a neighbourhood centre • a community centre • areas of formal and informal open space • provision for drainage and flood mitigation • a network of connected streets • off site infrastructure improvements

The design code is not to be confused with the details that form part of a detailed reserved matters application which is due to be submitted for approval at a later date. The design code will be used in the assessment of reserved matters applications. Applicants will be expected to demonstrate how they have conformed to the code.

In the light of the foregoing, it is important to set out the terms of reference for the design code.

The design code is expected to achieve the following:

• Advance the comprehensive master-planning and design of the approved development site; • Reinforce the quality standards; • Establish mandatory issues and issues subject to guidance; • Provide a tool for the local planning authority to actively manage design quality; and • Act as a technical manual for designers and developers.

The design cannot and is not expected to:

• Revisit or vary the outline consent; • Deal with matters beyond the site boundary; • Affect issues that are controlled by statutory authorities (e.g. highway authority responsibilities); and • Be taken in isolation from the ongoing design process (likely to be 10+ years)

- 45 -

NATIONAL AND LOCAL PLANNING POLICY: National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy Policy 13 – General Sustainable Development Principles Policy 14 – Energy Efficiency and Sustainable Construction Policy 16 – Sustainable Urban Extensions

CONSULTATIONS AND REPRESENTATIONS: Aside from the statutory consultations required under the Town and Country Planning (General Development Procedure) Order, two public meetings took place to publicise the code. One took place before the formal submission of the application to discharge the condition and another took place on the 1st of November to collate the responses arising from the formal consultation. The summary of responses and the measures taken to address these are produced below in tabular form.

Source Comment Response Alex 1. Code should be proof read Done Stevenson - for (occasional) grammatical Conservation and spelling errors. and Urban Design 2. P18. The graphic shows the Amended accordingly Upper Redhill Ridge as at a higher density than Lower Redhill. Surely the reverse is the case? 3. P28. The sectional picture- 30 or 90 degree parking graphic should be enlarged for would lead to wider clarity. On-street parking is carriageways, which run specified as “parallel bays”. contrary to the design Why can’t these be at 30 or code approach, and even 90 degrees? This point would not represent a occurs throughout the Code. I space-efficiency. This would argue that, particularly approach may be used in the non-primary streets, this within the neighbourhood represents both its own traffic centre, which will be calming but also a space- subject to detailed design efficiency. negotiation with the LPA, but is not advocated throughout the code. All dwellings will have some form of dedicated off- street parking, so parking bays will only be used in limited circumstances where the location lends itself to this. No change. - 46 -

Street Trees are given as Amended accordingly “informal arrangement”. The intended meaning is unclear. We want lots of trees, if necessary regularly spaced on both sides of the road. To that extent all primary streets should be designed as avenue-type. This point also occurs throughout the Code. 4. P29. First drawing, item #3: See comments in relation “limited on-street parking” to 3. above. Van should read “generous/ deliveries will relate to maximized” – occurs through- neighbourhood centre, out the Code. Wider streets which will be addressed designed to accommodate separately through generous casual parking detailed design either at road-side or in a negotiation. Central strip central reservation address is too narrow for trees problems of indiscriminate and the tree roots would parking on kerbs, etc. This is not establish well here. particularly true of service van delivery characteristics. Second drawing, item #1: could the central strip be treed? 5. P30. “Ridgeway is a Agreed and amended secondary street …” It is accordingly called Primary on P26. Plan on bottom left of page has no numbers to connect text above. In Specification, could “chicane/carriageway stagger” configuration be included in traffic calming items? This point occurs elsewhere in this section. 6. P31. Again, question of Agreed and amended whether Park Drive is Primary accordingly or Secondary. Plan indicates “larger street trees located at junctions” – but presumably there are trees intended elsewhere on Park Drive? - 47 -

7. P32. The “intimate Artist’s impressions are streetscape” mentioned would not available. Reference be best illustrated by an to target speed removed artist’s impression of a typical in favour of "speed limit". scene – the section is Annotation added. inadequate to show this. The plan beneath the section requires text annotation. The difference between a speed limit and a “target speed” needs to be spelt out. I would have thought in any case that limits could be based on design speed and that the road environment is designed accordingly. The national 30 mph will naturally pertain throughout the development (unless locally limited) without extra signing. 8. P33. “Lanes are low traffic Lanes cannot be internal routes designed exclusively for residential primarily for res. access.” access as they are part of Should this not read a connected network of “exclusively”? Note reference streets that will also allow again to “informally” arranged pedestrian and cycle trees - this term needs connections throughout tightening-up. As above, lower the development. graphic not fully annotated. Annotation added. 9. Graphic annotation. Also Agreed and amended check relationship to P35. accordingly. 10. P38. It seems Text is included with each unnecessary to repeat the character area to avoid generic text, e.g. tree support, unnecessary need for clipped hedging items. This is cross referencing by taking up a lot of space designers. No change. unnecessarily. 11. P39. Presumably the last Agreed and amended. heading should read “Grass Areas” (and on subsequent pages). 12. P48. Metal gates – This requirement is indicating “ball-topped” is intended to provoke over-prescriptive. There are developers into having the various interesting ways of gates designed and made detailing railings and this rather than installing the should be left to individual cheapest and most readily designers. available product. Variety on this theme will be acceptable. - 48 -

13. P53. “some visitor parking See comments in relation on-street is permissible on to 3. above. Local & Minor Routes.” As suggested above, this should be loosened up. Planned on- street parking should be maximized on all roads as a design plus. 14. P54. On-street angled See comments in relation parking typology. This is to 3. above. suitable for all streets (not just one-way), as in low-speed- desired environments it acts as an additional traffic-calming factor. 15. P58. The issue of possible Requirement for locked locking/gated access needs gates to control access addressing here. Parking and limit it to residents item – again, why parallel and has been inserted. why limited? The in-bock Neighbourhood centre environment must be made parking will be subject to attractive for residents, van- detailed design deliveries and other visitors negotiation. "A1 - A5 spill alike, or else the surrounding out space" refers to areas streets will be clogged up with in front of retail and indiscriminate opportunistic business uses that may parking. This happened wish to occupy footpath famously in Phase 1 of Upton space, for example, cafe in Northampton. Gardens tables or retail displays. item – what is an “A1-A5 spill out space”? 16. P59. Specify no public Agreed and amended access to rear area in Block accordingly. Type B. 17. P63. Windows & Doors - Amended to state roofs penultimate bullet point should be predominantly unclear. Roofs – “should be pitched or monopitched. pitched or mono-pitched”. Agreed and amended in What is wrong with flat roofs? relation to dormers. I feel this is over-prescriptive. Amended in relation to -“dormers should be chimneys and rainwater constructed in line with the goods. front or rear façade or built off the purlins”. Where else would they go? - add to 4th bullet point that gable chimneys should be either flush with the gable or half-projecting (in section) in accordance with local tradition. - 49 -

- last bullet point: requirement for metal rainwater goods (i.e. not “downpipes”) is ill-defined unless identified specifically for front elevations. 18. P66. Rationale. Para 2 – Agreed and amended. “Here we have picked out” Not Natural slate will be appropriate phraseology for acceptable, but reference a Design Code (see also to other slate substitutes P68). is considered too open Para 3. – why are we limited ended. Reference to to “concrete slates”? This colours is a catch-all for should be more open-ended doors and garage doors to include slate-substitute and but is also intended to also natural materials. limit unnecessary Colours. Of what, please? embellishments on (see also Ps. 68 & 70). facades. Walls. Assuming the top two images show stone, I would prefer it to be reasonably local material such as Great Tew or Clipsham. The three materials shown should be labelled stone, brick and timber as appropriate. 19. P67. Doors/Windows. No Natural wood in the “light natural wood” – all Upper Redhill Ridge windows to be painted either allows real timber white or possibly black or windows in keeping with other colour for contemporary the setting. Clear lacquer style buildings. (see also Ps. or colour palette can be 69 & 71). Balconies, used. Natural galvanised Metalwork. No natural metalwork is galvanised. All metals to be contemporary and factory colour-coated. (see considered appropriate. also Ps. 69 & 71). No change. 20. P70. As the Middle Redhill Agreed and amended character area has the highest accordingly. number of dwelling-houses, use of stone needs to be clearly signalled as an option. Units can be simply stone- fronted if required, or use stone on coping or window- surround details.

- 50 -

21. The yellow roof covering The three colours together shown will not complement form a colour blend called the buff bricks. "symphony" which is predominantly brown, brightened by yellow and cooled by light grey. This is considered a good match for Northampton- shire stone. The aim is to achieve a more colourful roofscape in this character area. No change. 22. P72. 1st para. “vehicles” Agreed and amended to should presumably read "residents" occupants. 23. P73. As this is the most No artist impression is interesting part of Phase 1, an available. artist’s impression would be beneficial. 24. P73. Bottom right – “scope Agreed - exceptions that exists for the use of a wider present excellent material palette where this architectural design and facilitates innovative and sustainable building sustainable design. Features design should always be such as green roofs & walls for considered favourably. example will be permissible.” This text ought to apply to the Phase 1 development at large and not be reserved just for the landmark building. 25. P76. “Ridge Park Agreed and amended (including Ridgeway Park accordingly. West)”. Scope for confusion. The parkland shown to the west of the plan is “Ridge Park West” (not “Ridgeway which is the name of the street). “Landscape Strategy (3156/C05/00143)” - this detail need to be cross-referenced in some way. 26. P100. End of Para. 1 – Agreed and amended “reduction of carbon” is badly- accordingly. phrased. - the Conditions on the outline planning permission have no “C” prefix. 27. P101. Box graphic – Agreed. surely reference to hydro, wave & tidal is unnecessary? - 51 -

28. 102. The phrase: “the Agreed and amended Design Code should therefore accordingly. reference/state/draw out …” is repeated three times. But this is the design Code! - the triangular graphic should be cross-referenced to the appropriate place in the P 103 text. Felicity Species of lime are a concern. Agreed and amended to Webber - Tilia x euchlora for the include London Plane as Landscape medium street tree category is a large tree species. apparently aphid free. Tilia x europea 'Pallida' is apparently not and should be used only on grass verges. Another large tree species should perhaps be included. I also wondered if there Hornbeam removed from should be so much hornbeam. the list of "predominant" I suggested that hedges species. where a high level of maintenance could not be guaranteed should perhaps not include hornbeam as it would become a large tree. I do have concerns about the Wood is considered amount of wood included in important as part of the the seats because of the fire natural landscape setting. hazard with vandals. No change. Comments Amend differences between Design code amended to received at Design Code and DAS clarify signal controlled meeting with regarding roundabout onto junction at Niort Way. BCW Niort Way. planning case officer, JPU representative and local highways authority representative on 16.10.12 page 9 - Amend figure 3 – Figure 3 replaced with IWIMP will not be in phase. approved parameter plan showing Phase 1 extent. Page 16 – Timescales for Text and accompanying delivery – Too prescriptive - drawing removed in Refer to Condition 5a agreement with Case Officer Content page to be added Done - 52 -

Perhaps put the wording of Done the conditions in the introduction? Consider private strip – larger Agreed and amendments variation in width made. Boundary treatments – All options reviewed and review/consider other options adjustments made where (pg 50) appropriate Street trees – WBC to review Done. and comment. Adhere to Highway Specification Reference to landscape Reference made in Part management plan? 5: Implementation Street lighting specification – Conversation with NCC unlikely to accept aluminium lighting contractor has street columns taken place and amendments made. Add timber bollard. Remove Done. stone bollard? Parking typologies – remove Done. on-street perpendicular image. More consideration needed for neighbourhood centre and note “subject to detailed investigation design work”. Housing types – graphic on Done. page 64 and 65. Make clearer Page 72 – Cycle storage and Done. bin storage. 3 bins a house. Page 73 – Amend the drawing Neighbourhood centre to for the local centre be subject to detailed design negotiation therefore drawing from the approved DAS is used here as a reminder of design objectives. Page 106 – Reference to Addressed in Part 5: Landscape Management Plan Implementation. and refer to “early consultation with the LA is recommended

- 53 -

STATUTORY BODIES

Source Comment Response

English Heritage Main concerns relate to the Ridge Park is located setting of the designated to ensure ongoing heritage assets at Great separation of Great Harrowden and Harrowden from Grange Farmhouse and how Wellingborough. this will be mitigated. Ridge Park will remain in perpetuity and therefore the two settlements will not join. The landscape plan for Ridge Park includes extensive native woodland planting to create a visual screen between settlements. There is an area of ridge and Grange Farmhouse furrow surrounding the will be surrounded by farmhouse, which is within parkland in perpetuity. Phase 1 of the The parkland co- development, and raised the incides with the area matter of its future of ridge and furrow to management. ensure its management. The Design Code has very The design code can little to say about the historic only address those environment context of the areas which fall within development and how the the boundary of design proposals respond to Phase 1. The the setting of the designated approved outline heritage assets, as well as the planning application landscape and its accompanying design and access statement highlight considerable regard to the surrounding context, and the approved plans have taken this into account. This is not a design code matter. - 54 -

We do welcome the reference Agreed. Reference to to the protection and management is made interpretation of some in Part 5, and the archaeological features, landowner recognises including ridge and furrow on the opportunity and page 82. However, the key benefit of establishing issue for the future will be the a trust type effectiveness of the arrangement. management and Condition 12 of the maintenance regimes to be Outline planning developed for the areas of consent requires a open space and structural landscape landscaping (page 106).It is management plan to vital that this matter is be approved by the resolved, as soon as possible, LPA at the reserved to ensure the appropriate matters stage. ongoing management of these areas. It may be that the establishment of a trust, such as the Milton Keynes Parks Trust may provide a model for achieving the diverse range of management and maintenance that will be required. Highways Agency The information regarding the No response required ‘Design Codes’ pertaining to this development present no issues for the Highways Agency and we therefore have no further comments to make regarding this application. Northants Police Northamptonshire Police has Liaison with Secured no formal objection to the by Design officer has planning application in taken place - no principle other than to impress change. BCW has the importance that the already addressed following recommendations/ comments made in informatives are included, June 2009 and made which if implemented will an appropriate reduce the likelihood of crime, decision. disorder and anti-social behaviour occurring. We are pleased to see the reference to Secured by Design within the Design Code which should open up the opportunity to design out crime and as such satisfies our requirements regarding the Condition. - 55 -

Our position however remains the same as indicated in the responses provided by Kelly McDermott on the 17th of June 2009 (design issues) and on the 27th of July 2009 (S106 bid for CCTV and ANPR) The Wildlife Trust With reference to the separate Tables relating to treatments given, in Part 3 to Ridge Park also the Design Code, to the related to Ridge Park named ‘Strategic Landscape West. Amended Places’, where are the Tables, accordingly. following Page 84, giving the details of the “Landscape Themes”, etc. for Ridge Park West in a similar way to the information provided for the Ridge Park, The Swales and the Brook Park areas. The Wildlife Trust Earlier this afternoon, I have - Amended undertaken a review of your Design Code repeat consultation exercise comments with The Wildlife Trust concerning the amended submission of Application No. WP/2012/0458/DOC for the Upper Redhill development site. However, although I can see that there appears to indeed be an amended version of the Phase 1 Design Code document as produced by David Lock Associates listed on your Authority’s website ( under “DRAFT Design Code PRINT - NOV 2012 - amended document” ), I’m afraid that since it is a 114-page report I have not been able to tell just what the revised bits of it might be. So, can I kindly please ask you that if you are actually wanting any specific ecological-related feedback from The Wildlife Trust in relation to this re-submitted/ amended Application, would you please draw my attention to the very specific references within that larger document. - 56 -

With the recent advent of the Noted with thanks - Nene Valley Nature this will be addressed Improvement Area ( NIA ), at the detailed design please note that a portion of stage. the south-eastern corner of the overall Upper Redhill development site, including a part of the Phase 1 area too, now lies inside the Nene Valley NIA zone too.

GREAT HARROWDEN VILLAGE

Source Comment Response

Bob King: The nature of the green space Plans for Ridge Park Clerk to Great separating the development have been amended Harrowden from the edge of the village in the design code to Village was a major concern. The create a dense area village is very concerned over of native woodland how this space will be around the village. managed when the development is completed. 2 options where requested by the meeting: a. Managed farmland, grazing or arable. b. A woodland area consisting of mixed planting of native trees with integral pathways, however, these pathways should not lead to the village. The extent of the green space Manor Farm lies was discussed and some outside the approved clarification of the land around application boundary Manor Farm in Great and is not subject to Harrowden is needed. the design code. The farm is owned by Northants LLP but is not part of the proposals for Upper Redhill. Assurance is sought that the Building heights were restriction on the build height approved at the such that the ridge of the outline planning and tallest building is below the cannot be changed ridge line of the ground. through the design code. The area closest to Great Harrowden will be limited to two storey development. - 57 -

Concern over that Road Road lighting will be Lighting of the development installed to satisfy the was discussed. How will the requirements of the developer limit the effect of this Local Highways lighting on those village Authority. The design residents facing the code cannot change development and on wildlife? this. However, all lighting now casts a down-light to limit impact. Clarification of area G on the This defence has plans required, specifically been removed. There what does “limited access to will be no direct the village “ mean? access from the village into Ridge Park. The development will lead to This junction is additional traffic through the outside Phase 1 and village and increased problems therefore cannot be with the junction of Orlingbury addressed in the Rd with the A509. The design code. The meeting would like to see what Section 106 traffic calming methods are Agreement relating to proposed to address these the Outline Planning issues. Consent includes provision for agreed sums to be commuted to the Local Highway Authority. The Authority will decide how best to spend these sums to manage traffic outside the development boundary. Replacement of the existing This matter cannot be road signs in the village will addressed through need to be suitable for the the design code. The historic nature of the village. Local Highways Authority confirm that alternative signs are available for use in historic environments.

- 58 -

REDHILL GRANGE

Source Comment Response

Mike Chislett 1. The copy of the application Contents page now supplied to me on disc by the complete. BCoW is headed DRAFT and Parts 1,2,3,4 and 5 are shown as TO BE COMPLETED. Comment: If this is the state of the document as submitted it would suggest that it has been prepared in haste and submitted prematurely.

2. The Figures shown in the Agreed and amended application are not as listed in accordingly. the 23/02/2010 decision letter and no reference is made to them. The following illustrates this point: Figure 2, Illustrative Master plan, - should be Master plan drawing numbered BBD008/010BC. It should be noted that the Illustrative Master plan is not consistent with the drawing numbered BBD008/010BC. Figure 3 Phasing Plan – no such plan as this is listed in the decision letter, phasing is detailed in Parameter Plans H, I & J; drawing numbers BBD008/017.01/J, BBD008/017.02/J, BBD008/017.03/J Figure 6 Phase 1 – should be Parameter Plan; drawing number BBD008/017.01/J

- 59 -

3. The coverage of the network Condition 2 of the including route hierarchy Outline Planning requirement, part of Condition Consent states that 5, is fatally flawed. It states:- the IWImp must be Access & Movement: The plan completed and promotes a hierarchy of brought into use prior connected streets to allow for to the occupation of easy access, efficient through any dwellings within movement and quieter Phase 2 & 3. The residential streets. Through the IWImp does not form plan the downgrading of the part of Phase 1 and existing A509 will be achieved therefore is not as the proposed Isham to subject to this design Wellingborough Improvement code. The Regulatory road is built. This will reduce Plan has been the impact of all traffic on the amended to show the existing town and nearby existing A509. villages to the north of Upper Redhill. Although there is, as yet, no date for the building of the Isham to Wellingborough extension of the Isham bypass, the document has no contingency plan to cope with traffic until the extension is built. In fact, the Regulatory Plan in the document shows that the existing A509 road is no longer present and that all traffic north is to be routed via the old A509; a road that was deemed inadequate for the traffic levels of the 1990s. 4. Examples of vague state- This statement ments: Existing Community: appears in Appendix The site wraps around the A which describes the existing community at Redhill wider vision for Upper Grange. The setting of this Redhill. It relates to community will change as the an area outside development proceeds, and will Phase 1 and require particular attention to be therefore is only paid at the detailed design provided for context. stage to development immediately abutting the area. Comment: Who will be responsible for paying this “particular attention”? - 60 -

Parcelisation: The landowner This statement aims will divide the residential areas to give an indication into suitably sized residential of how the parcels. The landowner will development is oversee the design of the expected to proceed, reserved matters application i.e. the land will be for each parcel. It is likely that subdivided and sold house builders will acquire to house builders. No parcels from the landowner, contingency plan is and will be responsible for the considered construction of new dwellings, necessary. local and minor streets and small scale open spaces and neighbourhood play areas. Comment: If it is only “likely that house builders will acquire parcels of land”, what is the contingency plan if this likelihood does not materialise.

Management and A landscape Maintenance: management plan is The landowner will maintain required by Condition the open space during the 12. construction stage. Thereafter, The developer will the landowner will agree with undertake the local authority the most maintenance in appropriate means for accordance with what maintaining the open space in is agreed with the perpetuity. LPA. Comment: Having stated in the document that the development of Phase 1 will take many years to complete, is the developer proposing to undertake the maintenance of the open space for the whole of this time.

- 61 -

All roads will be built to The process of road adoptable standard and will be adoption is well adopted and maintained by established. Detailed Northamptonshire County road design will need Council as local highway to ensure roads are authority. This will include the designed to maintenance of street trees adoptable standards and lighting. & the Local Highways Comment: Authority will approve Again, given the extended all applications. This timescale that the development is a matter for of Phase 1 will take to agreement between complete, how will the the landowner and adoption process be Highways Authority scheduled. but it is currently The statement also makes the expected that roads assumption that will be adopted once Northamptonshire County they are completed. Council will be prepared to take on the maintenance at the convenience of the developer. Borough Council of These are realistic Wellingborough: BCW [have and reasonable approved] the design code as assumptions. The a material consideration to be landowner has been used in the determination of all working closely with reserved matters applications. officers at BCW who A checklist will be provided for have been supportive applicants to demonstrate how of the code's they have complied with the preparation. code; this is aimed at assisting Applicants cannot be the local planning authority in defined at this stage their approvals process, because it is not including consultation with known who will buy other authorities and agencies. and develop land. Comment: The developer Condition 5 of the would seem to be making the Outline Planning assumption that the BCoW will Consent requires approve the design code; an reserved matters to assumption that may be a little be in accordance with premature. The developer the approved design would also seem to be making code. the assumption that “applicants” (who have not been defined) will be prepared to comply with the code; again, another assumption.

- 62 -

Final Comment: At 114 pages, The design code is the document is a formidable primarily a technical object for the layman to tackle design manual aimed for the purposes of comment at planning and and, in practice, much of design professionals, importance can be missed. and the length of the Hopefully, the professionals at code has been the BCoW will not be so determined by the hampered. number of issues to be addressed in accordance with Condition 5 of the Outline Planning Consent.

- 63 -

Verbal comments If Phase 3 of the approved The design code received from development will not now be cannot change the Redhill Grange built, why should the approved parameter Community neighbourhood centre remain plans, and so the Association at a in its current location, which code has been meeting held at will effectively be on the edge prepared in BCW on 1.11.12 of the new development. accordance with the approved Master Plan. The neighbourhood centre must be visible and accessible from a thoroughfare as well as being accessible within the development to ensure its commercial viability. However, the landowner is willing to discuss this matter with the LPA and if all parties are agreed a minor amendment to the approved master plan can be applied for. This would prompt a minor amendment to the design code, which would be agreed with officers, ahead of any detailed design negotiations relating to the neighbourhood centre. The landowner will seriously consider the comments made by the Redhill Grange Community Association.

- 64 -

E-mail from To quote the Director of To clarify, the design Susan Shuttle David Lock Associates at the code is to be prepared 9.11.12 recent presentation of the in accordance with the Draft Design Code, the approved Strategic outline consent can not be Master Plan, indicating re-visited or varied. that the design code is subservient to the master plan. Should a variation to the outline consent be required, this could be applied for through the submission of an application to vary the consent. However, such a variation cannot be achieved through the design code. This being the case, it is Following consultation, presumably the reason why all drawings prepared new roads to the east through specifically for the and around Redhill Grange design code have remain on the maps in the been updated to Design Code. Although it remove the suggestion was recently made clear, by of connections the developer that they had between Phase 1 and no intention of buying the Phase 3. Plans land from Council to develop produced as part of the Phase 3, it is still being outline planning referred to in the Design application and Design Code. Obviously these roads & Access Statement either remain in an attempt to have been reproduced comply with the original to inform the design application for which code. The developer permission was granted, or has confirmed their because it will necessarily be commitment not to required to spread the sheer build Phase 3; volume of traffic caused by:- however, the formally consented plans remain and should not be amended. Reference is made in the Appendix to Phase 3, only as a way of explaining the wider context for Phase 1. No roads will be built in Phase 3. - 65 -

The lack of major road The Outline Planning improvement to the north west Consent requires the of the site (IWImp) and no IWImp to be prospect of this coming operational prior to forward during the first phase, the occupation of any as suggested by the Inspector dwellings within in his Report to the Secretary Phase 2 and 3. of State. Therefore Phase 1 of the scheme can proceed to completion without the construction of the IWImp.

The A509 will, therefore, still The A509 will retain be the main road and not its current role and downgraded as originally function prior to the intended. It will bear the construction of the highest density of housing and IWImp. However, public centres/retail adjacent to there will be no what is already the main route access between between Wellingborough and Phase 1 and the Kettering and the general A509 Kettering Road, hospital without accounting for and therefore it will the potential 2000+ vehicles not "bear the highest resulting from Phase 1 density housing and residents alone. In addition it public centres/retail". will be in sight of what is All access to Phase 1 already an established and will be from the A509 thriving retail complex and Niort Way. proposed church/community centre on the opposite side of the main road.

- 66 -

Part 1 Masterplanning Phase 1 This text has been also includes "the commence- removed in response ment of the first phase of to feedback from public transport provision, BCW. The comprising an extension of requirement for public existing bus services to serve transport is part of the the initial phase of develop- Section 106 ment and existing development Agreement which at Redhill Grange." With the accompanies the prospect of main road routes in Outline Planning Phase 1 and our current bus Consent. Prior to the service it certainly merits a occupation of the detailed explanation of such development the plans for residents of Redhill owner must update Grange and before this Design the travel plan for Code becomes accepted and Upper Redhill, and unchanging. have this approved in writing. The travel plan will include measures to ensure bus services deliver routes and frequencies to meet the needs arising from the development. Condition 5 of the outline consent does not require work on bus routes, and indeed this is beyond the scope of a design code. Inspectors Report - paragraph 5.116 highlights the benefits to existing residents that will arise from the IWImp, and notes that Redhill Grange will not accommodate through movement.

- 67 -

We are aware of clauses Paragraph 5.122 contained in 5.116 and 5.122 states that the of the Inspector's accepted Section 106 Report. Agreement provides £2.5m to be drawn down y the Highways Agency on commencement of the development to ensure that no adverse impact is caused by the development on the strategic road network. Also, it refers to condition 30 of the outline planning consent which states that before development commences, the applicant shall undertake public consultation with the residents of Redhill Grange concerning any alterations to the existing access arrangements or the creation of new access or accesses to Redhill Grange. The developer will be required to comply with these requirements.

Third Party Responses

Consultee Date logged Object or Comments on SX3 Support Emma Garside 22-Oct-12 object infrastructure - school, 42 Holcot Close doctor etc.. Wellingborough Traffic, amenity Northants NN8 5FL house prices etc… Mr Steven Cox 23-Oct-12 object amenity 37 Appleby Close visual impact Wellingborough house prices etc… Northants - 68 -

Gregory York 25-Oct-12 object privacy no address overlooking supplied buses air pollution security amenity harm Developer making money etc… David Cornhill 26-Oct-12 object Can't access details from 7 Lyle Court Council website Wellingborough Highways & traffic NN8 5WJ Bypass & phasing etc… Shelly Lawrence- 30-Oct-12 object Flooding Harris, Need not established 10 Furnace Highways etc… Cottages, Furnace Lane, Finedon Sidings, Northants NN9 5NZ W J J Ratcliffe 30-Oct-12 object insufficient infrastructural 3 Holcot Close information Redwell Wellingborough Northants NN8 5FL Mr M J Chislett 02-Nov-12 object Although the Design 4 Appleby Close Codes document is Redhill Grange probably straight from the Wellingborough text book and, in practical NN9 5YN terms, only of academic interest, there is no excuse for the applicant not approaching it's preparation in a professional manner. The document would, however, seem to have been put together without sufficient attention to the requirements of the conditions or the practicalities of what is being proposed. It should therefore should be rejected and returned to the originator for correction and re- submission. In detail:- Etc... - 69 -

Philip Wallington 02-Nov-12 object Loss of countryside ADDRESS We have been waiting for UNKNOWN WEAST to be built Developers making a profit Etc… Mr & Mrs Ziabek 04-Nov-12 object Light 39 Appleby Close Noise Wellingborough Ecology Northants Etc.. NN9 5YN Graham Mower 05-Nov-12 object One of our main ADDRESS objections to the original UNKNOWN plan was the size and position of the Neighbourhood Centre. We felt that it was in the wrong location right against the west side of Redhill Grange. This is at the extreme edge of Phases 1 and 2 of the proposed development and too close to existing local centres of Redhill Farm and Gleneagles. Etc... Mrs Tracey Bates 06-Nov-12 object The government did not 180 Chatsworth have the foresight to see Drive that when they deceiced Wellingborough to join the EU and let NN8 5FB everyone into our country that the children will need to be educated, putting extra pressure on our teaching staff because most of them coming in can't even speak English!!!!! Etc.. Mr & Mrs J Burton 07-Nov-12 object Lack of consultation 7 Appleby Close Documents to full of Wellingborough jargon NN9 5YN Etc… Neil Kipling 08-Nov-12 object Highways 15 The Downs Ecology Wellingborough Loss countryside Northants Etc… NN9 5YP - 70 -

Susan Suttle 09-Nov-12 object To quote the Director of 8 The Banks David Lock Associates at Redhill Grange the recent presentation of Wellingborough the Draft Design Code, Northants the outline consent can NN9 5YX not be re-visited or varied. Highways and Traffic Etc…

ASSESSMENT: The merits of the proposed development have been established by the appeal decision. The issues for consideration are to examine the desirability of the layout of the development, the appearance and scale of the dwellings and the landscape proposals.

Paragraph 14 of the NPPF states that at the heart of the framework is a “presumption in favour of sustainable development.” In order to achieve sustainable development, the NPPF includes a set of core planning principles which, in terms of relevance for this application, are detailed below:

• “Always seek to secure high quality design and a good standard of amenity for all existing and future occupants of land and buildings; • Promote mixed use developments, and encourage multiple benefits from the use of land in urban and rural areas, recognising that some open land can perform many functions (such as for wildlife, recreation, flood risk mitigation, carbon storage, or food production); • Actively manage patterns of growth to make the fullest possible use of public transport, walking and cycling, and focus significant development in locations which are or can be made sustainable.”

In requiring good design, paragraph 56 indicates that “The Government attaches great importance to the design of the built environment. Good design is a key aspect of sustainable development, is indivisible from good planning, and should contribute positively to making places better for people.” Paragraph 57 continues by stating that “It is important to plan positively for the achievement of high quality and inclusive design for all development, including individual buildings, public and private spaces and wider area development schemes.” Paragraph 60 indicates that “planning policies and decisions should not attempt to impose architectural styles or particular tastes and they should not stifle innovation, originality or initiative through unsubstantiated requirements to conform to certain development forms or styles. It is, however, proper to seek to promote or reinforce local distinctiveness.”

Policy 13 of the Core Strategy expects new development to: Incorporate flexible designs for buildings and their settings, including access to amenity space, enabling them to be adapted to future needs and to take into account the needs of all users; seek to design out antisocial behaviour, crime and reduce the fear of crime by applying the principles of the “Secured by Design scheme”; maintain and improve the provision of accessible local services and community services, whilst focusing uses that attract a lot of visitors within the town centres; have a satisfactory means of access and provide - 71 -

for parking, servicing and manoeuvring in accordance with adopted standards; be designed to take full account of the transport user hierarchy of pedestrian-cyclist-public transport-private vehicle, and incorporate measures to contribute to an overall target of 20% modal shift in developments of over 200 dwellings and elsewhere 5% over the plan period; be of a high standard of design, architecture and landscaping, respects and enhances the character of its surroundings and is in accordance with the Environmental Character of the area; and create a strong sense of place by strengthening the distinctive historic and cultural qualities and townscape of the towns and villages through its design, landscaping and use of public art.

The objectives are echoed by Policy 16 (Sustainable Urban Extension) which, amongst other matters, counsels new development to respect the environmental character of its rural surroundings and existing townscape character. Furthermore, it expects particular attention to be given to the creation of a well designed and defined edge to development and a sensitive transition to adjoining areas in the wider countryside. Proposals will need to include plans for the long term use and management of these areas.

It is considered that the submitted design code fulfils the objectives of the development plan and is consistent with the provisions in the NPPF that are set out above. The code would form the basis for achieving a development that is consistent with and enhance the overall environmental character of the surrounding development at Redhill Grange, Great Harrowden and to the south at Gleneagles. It should be noted that the outline proposal seeks to achieve 40 dwellings per hectare for 76% of the 1500 homes within phase 1. The design code seeks to change that to a more favourable lower density of 32 dwellings per hectare for 90% of 1250 homes. Implicit in these figures is the fact the resulting development will have a more spacious and pleasant appearance.

RECOMMENDATION: Approve the design code and partially discharge condition 5 in so far as it relates to Phase 1 of the approved development.

INFORMATIVE/S: 1. Pursuant to Section 38 (6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004, the proposed development complies with the applicable development plan policies and there are no other material considerations that would constitute sustainable grounds for refusal. These include specifically the following policies: North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy Policy 13 - General Sustainable Development Principles Policy 14 - Energy Efficiency and Sustainable Construction Policy 16 - Sustainable Urban Extensions 2. The applicant is advised that this decision relates to the following document. Document: Date Received: Design Code November 2012

- 72 -

BOROUGH COUNCIL OF WELLINGBOROUGH

Planning Committee 19/12/2012

Report of the Head of Planning and Local Development

APPLICATION REF: WP/2012/0525/TX

PROPOSAL: Application for a new outline planning permission to replace an extant outline planning permission, in order to extend the time limit for implementation for Ref: WP/2008/0150/OEIA for up to 3000 dwellings, retail and commercial facilities, non-residential institutions (including primary schools and nurseries) a neighbourhood centre (comprising transport interchange, non-institutional and community facilities), open spaces and parkland, associated facilities and infrastructure (comprising utilities gas, electricity and water, sewerage and telecommunications and diversion to existing utilities where necessary) and a reserve corridor for the Isham- Wellingborough improvement (IWIMP).

LOCATION: Land off the A509 Niort Way and A510 Northen Way and south of Great Harrowden, Wellingborough.

APPLICANT: Mr Mark Best, Midtown Capital Limited.

Strategic Application/Major Development.

BACKGROUND TO THE PROPOSAL. Consent is sought for a new outline planning permission to replace an extant outline permission, in order to extend the time limit for its implementation. The extant permission (WP/2008/0150/OEIA) is for up to 3,000 dwellings and complementary uses on land off the A509 Niort Way and the A510 Northen Way and south of Great Harrowden, to the north of Wellingborough. This proposed sustainable urban extension is known as North Wellingborough.

The extant permission was granted on appeal by the Secretary of State on 23 February 2010. Condition 1 on that permission requires applications for the approval of all the reserved matters for Phase 1 of North Wellingborough to be submitted within 3 years, i.e. by 23 February 2013. The new permission being sought would enable this imminent deadline to be extended by 2 years. The applicant, in their supporting/update statement claims that extending the date for submission of all the Phase 1 Reserved Matters applications will enable the detailed design of North Wellingborough to be discussed and worked up in full consultation with the Council, other stakeholders and WP/2012/0525/TX

Planning & Local Development © Crown Copyright and database right 2012. Scale: Ordnance Survey 100018694. Legend This map is accurate 1:16,000 Cities Revealed to the scale specified Aerial Photography copyright: WP/2012/0525/TX - Land off the A509 Niort Way & A510 Northern Way & South of Great Harrowden when reproduced at A4 ± GetMapping PLC 1999 - 73 - local residents’ groups. Equally, extending the date will allow stronger developer interest to emerge as the economy recovers and the market improves, resulting in a more streamlined and consistent delivery programme for development on site.

The scope of the information required to support this application was agreed through a letter from the Council to the applicant’s agent on 17 October 2012, which responded to the scope proposed by the agent in a letter on 10 October 2012. The information submitted in respect of the current application accords with the scope set out by the Council. Nonetheless, the information should be read in conjunction with that submitted in support of the original outline application (WP/2008/0150/OEIA). There are no changes proposed to the Unilateral Undertaking that was submitted at the appeal. The document had already been considered and accepted by the Secretary of State in reaching a decision to grant consent in February 2010.

NATIONAL AND LOCAL PLANNING POLICY: The Act – The Plan Led System: Section 38 (6) Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004. ‘If regard is to be had to the development plan for the purposes 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’

National Planning Policy Framework: Paragraphs 11 – 13 states: Planning law requires that applications for planning permission must be determined in accordance with the development plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise. 12. This National Planning Policy Framework does not change the statutory status of the development plan as the starting point for decision making. Proposed development that accords with an up-to-date Local Plan should be approved, and proposed development that conflicts should be refused unless other material considerations indicate otherwise. It is highly desirable that local planning authorities should have an up-to-date plan in place. 13. The National Planning Policy Framework constitutes guidance for local planning authorities and decision-takers both in drawing up plans and as a material consideration in determining applications.

Paragraph 14 states: For decision-taking this means: approving development proposals that accord with the development plan without delay; and where the development plan is absent, silent or relevant policies are out of date, granting permission unless: any adverse impacts of doing so would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits, when assessed against the policies in this Framework taken as a whole; or specific policies in this Framework indicate development should be restricted.

The Development Plan includes: - The Regional Spatial Strategy (RSS) 8 (including the Milton Keynes – South Midlands Sub-Regional Strategy MKSM) - The North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy (NNCSS) - Retained or 'saved' policies in the Wellingborough Local Plan (LP).

Other informal guidance/background documents (IG) – notably: - Planning Guidance for Wellingborough North Sustainable Urban Extension (Appendix 8) - 74 -

- Adopted Planning Contributions Guide - Local Development Framework Evidence Base

Material Consideration - The North Northamptonshire Annual Monitoring Report (December 2011) (AMR) indicates that the Council is unable to identify a five-year supply of deliverable land for housing. Measured against RSS figures the Borough of Wellingborough has only sufficient land supply in the area for 2.14 years, reflecting an overall shortfall across the next 5 year period of over 3,100 houses.

SUMMARY OF REPLIES TO CONSULTATIONS/REPRESENTATIONS RECEIVED: 1. The Highways Agency – raised no objection. Thank you for consulting the Highways Agency (HA) on the above application (WP/2012/0525/TX) received on the 20th November for the replacement of the outline extant outline planning permission, an extension of the time limit for the implementation of planning application WP/2008/0150/OEIA. The HA's response to this application is on this occasion the same as that given to Wellingborough council on the 2nd December 2008 and in the following letter sent on the 20th January 2009.

Our letter of 2nd December, bullet pointed as follows the appropriate mitigation necessary and which is still the case: · An agreed level of funding to deliver the defined improvement works to the Wilby Way junction or such alternative scheme or improvement in the vicinity of the site on the A14 or A45, to be determined in consultation with the Highways Agency; · Appropriate Travel Plan measures being defined and measures for their implementation and monitoring, including agreed penalties for failure to meet Travel Plan targets to be determined in consultation with the Highways Agency.

Our response of the 2nd December 2009 offered no objections to the development subject to an agreed level of funding to improve the Wilby Way junction, via a S106 Agreement and an appropriate Travel Plan. The HA briefing note of the 20th January 2009 explains in detail the necessary works and costs associated with the Wilby Way improvement (both letters are attached for information).

2. NCC Planning - in relation to the above planning application the County Council, as the Waste Planning Authority, has the following comments.

Prior to any development taking place, the applicant should demonstrate how it meets Policies CS7 and CS8 of the Northamptonshire Minerals and Waste Development Framework (MWDF) Core Strategy (adopted May 2010). Policy CS7 of the MWDF Core Strategy states that proposals for the new development should seek to utilise the efficient use of resources in both the construction phase and its operation. Policy CS8 of the MWDF Core Strategy encourages the integration of waste management facilities in areas of significant new development.

In addition the MWDF Development and Implementation Principles Supplementary Planning Document (SPD), adopted March 2007, provides more - 75 -

detailed guidance on the requirements of Policies CS7 and CS8 of the MWDF Core Strategy.

The SPD has regard to Policy CS7 through the ‘Principles for development related waste minimisation’ and requires all developers to prepare and submit a Waste Audit, which is to accompany the planning application. This allows for informed decision making and consideration of waste management issues throughout the planning process. Detailed guidance is set out in paragraphs 2.12 to 2.27. Standard conditions for inclusion in planning permissions to ensure effective implementation of the SPD are outlined in paragraph 2.27.

The SPD has regard to Policy CS8 through the ‘Principles for the provision of waste management facilities’ and requires all forms of development to prepare and submit a Waste Management Facilities Strategy, which is to accompany the planning application. The purpose of which is to demonstrate the provision of individual waste management design features (internal and/or external) that support the separation, storage, and collection of waste in order to increase the efficiency of its subsequent re-use, recycling, and treatment. Detailed guidance on development thresholds and planning applications is set out in paragraphs 2.29 to 2.39, the provision of facilities and reporting requirements are set out in paragraphs 2.43 to 2.51. Standard conditions for inclusion in planning permissions to ensure effective implementation of the SPD are outlined in paragraph 2.52.

3. Natural England – would expect the LPA to assess and consider the possible impacts resulting from this proposal on the following issues when determining this application: Protected species; Local Wildlife sites; Biodiversity enhancements; and Local landscapes.

And

“Thank you for your consultation dated 20 November 2012 and received by Natural England on 20 November 2012.

Natural England is a non-departmental public body. Our statutory purpose is to ensure that the natural environment is conserved, enhanced, and managed for the benefit of present and future generations, thereby contributing to sustainable development.

From the information provided with this application, it does not appear to fall within the scope of the consultations that Natural England would routinely comment on. The lack of specific comment from Natural England should not be interpreted as a statement that there are no impacts on the natural environment, but only that the application is not likely to result in significant impacts on statutory designated sites, landscapes or species. It is for the local authority to determine whether or not this application is consistent with national or local policies on biodiversity and landscape and other bodies and individuals may be able to help the Local Planning Authority (LPA) to fully take account of the environmental value of this site in the decision making process, LPAs should - 76 -

seek the views of their own ecologists when determining the environmental impacts of this development.

We would, in any event, expect the LPA to assess and consider the possible impacts resulting from this proposal on the following issues when determining this application:

Protected species If the LPA is aware of, or representations from other parties highlight the possible presence of a protected or Biodiversity Action Plan (BAP) species on the site, the authority should request survey information from the applicant before determining the application. The Government has provided advice1 on BAP and protected species and their consideration in the planning system.

Natural England Standing Advice is available on our website to help local planning authorities better understand the impact of this particular development on protected or BAP species should they be identified as an issue at particular developments. This also sets out when, following receipt of survey information, the authority should undertake further consultation with Natural England.

Local wildlife sites If the proposal site could result in an impact on a Local Site2, Local Nature Reserve (LNR) or priority habitat the authority should ensure it has sufficient information to fully understand the impact of the proposal on the local site before it determines the application, ensuring that it does so in conformity with the wording of paragraph 168 of the National Planning Policy Framework. For further information on Local Sites, your authority should seek views from your ecologist, or the Local Sites designation body in your area.

Biodiversity enhancements This application may provide opportunities to incorporate features into the design which are beneficial to wildlife, such as the incorporation of roosting opportunities for bats or the installation of bird nest boxes. The authority should consider securing measures to enhance the biodiversity of the site from the applicant, if it is minded to grant permission for this application. This is in accordance with Paragraph 118 of the NPPF. Additionally, we would draw your attention to Section 40 of the Natural Environment and Rural Communities Act (2006) which states that ‘Every public authority must, in exercising its functions, have regard, so far as is consistent with the proper exercise of those functions, to the purpose of conserving biodiversity’. Section 40(3) of the same Act also states that ‘conserving biodiversity includes, in relation to a living organism or type of habitat, restoring or enhancing a population or habitat’.

Local Landscape This proposal does not appear to be either located within, or within the setting of, any nationally designated landscape. All proposals however should complement and where possible enhance local distinctiveness and be guided by your Authority’s landscape character assessment where available, and the policies protecting landscape character in your local plan or development framework.

- 77 -

Should the proposal be amended in a way which significantly affects its impact on the natural environment then, in accordance with Section 4 of the Natural Environment and Rural Communities Act 2006, Natural England should be consulted again.

1 Paragraph 98 and 99 of ODPM Circular 06/2005 2 As defined in the DEFRA Local Sites guidance”

4. English Heritage – no objection.

5. Little Harrowden Parish Council – “With reference to the above application Little Harrowden Parish Council have no objections.”

6. Ramblers Association -

“I am commenting on this matter on behalf of the Ramblers’ Association Northamptonshire Area footpath Committee.

Sustainable Transport The County Council is placing emphasis on sustainable modes of transport. The applicant should revise their walking proposals in the light of the County Council’s Walking Strategy Consultation Draft (Sept 2012). They should ensure that residents of the new development have the optimum opportunity to walk to work, school, shopping and leisure facilities.

Informal recreation Wellingborough has relatively few public rights of way leasing into the countryside. This development affords an excellent opportunity to develop countryside access. We proposed a number of new footpath links in our response to WP/2007/0750 and drew attention to our proposals in response to WP/2008/0750. They are repeated below for your convenience.

New Footpath Links Provision of the following footpath links will allow informal short circular walks in the countryside for residents of the development, away from the formalised urban development. The paths also provide links to the inter-village path network, allowing longer countryside walks thus allowing the walker to visit the surrounding villages, and providing footpath links to the proposed development of Kettering East:

FP1: From the north-east corner of the proposed development, east along the course of Harrowden Lane, to the path leading to Finedon Pocket Park at Grid Reference SP905/711 (Fig 1). The walker can then proceed through the pocket park to Finedon. From Finedon there are paths south to Ditchford and the Nene Way, east to the Addingtons and the Nene Way, and north to Burton Latimer and Kettering East. In addition, public byway TH8 can be used to gain Isham or Burton Latimer, and public bridleway TH6 can be used to access Finedon Road industry.

FP2: From public footpath TH3 eastward along Harrowden Brook to Grid Reference SP880/716, then NNW to Hill Top Road (opposite public footpath - 78 -

TK18, Fig 1). The path provides a direct walkers route to Isham via the delightful Frisby Lane (TK18).

FP3: From the north-west corner of the development on public bridleway TH2 (Grid Reference SP863/699 then north-east along the Harrowden Brook to meet public footpath TH3, and continue as FP2 above (Figs 1 and 2). The path provides a short circular walk for residents, and links to public footpaths TH3 and TK18 for longer countryside walks.

FP4: from where a path shown on the development meets bridleway TH2 (Grid Reference SP867/702) north-west, across FP3, to join the road opposite public bridleway TK22 (Grid Reference SP863/705 Fig 2). The path provides short circular walks from the west side of the development and allows walks around the villages of Hardwick, Orlingbury and Little Harrowden.

We note that the majority of the proposed paths run on land already owned by the developer.

Motor Roads A development of this size is likely to cause a large increase in rat-running cars along Harrowden Lane to Finedon. This is most undesirable. Harrowden Lane should be converted into a “Quiet Lane” by dividing it at some convenient point, thus preventing motor traffic from using it as a through route, to the benefit of road safety in general and of non-motorised users in particular.

If Upper Redhill is to be developed, either now or at some time in the future, then it is most undesirable that it be divided by the A509 improvement and its link road. Both the present development, and the related Pulse Park (WP/2008/0060), demonstrate that route 5, alongside the Midland Railway, should be the preferred route.

We suggest provision of the above footpath links should be added to the s106 agreement with the developer.”

7. Northamptonshire Police –

“Northamptonshire Police has no formal objection to the outline planning application in principle other than to impress the importance that the following recommendations/informatives are included, which if implemented will reduce the likelihood of crime, disorder and anti-social behavior occurring.

8. North Northants Badger Group –

“Thank you for consulting the North Northants Badger Group. - 79 -

Our objection is based on the fact that there is no updated environmental statement/Badger survey included with this application.

We consider that this reapplication cannot be properly considered until the above are supplied.”

9. Network Rail -

“Thank you for your letter of 21/11/2012 providing Network Rail with an opportunity to comment on the abovementioned application.

In relation to the above application I can confirm that Network Rail has no observations to make.”

10. Mr Greg York of no. 41 Appleby Close - in receipt of the above application, yet another waste of time, so they want to extend the planning application, I personally think that shouldn’t be allowed. I’m led to believe this is a Government initiative allowing people to extend the planning deadline due to the downturn but personally I don’t agree. I recently (two weeks ago) went to purchase a house where the planning had lapsed and was categorically told that I would have to reapply since a shovel hasn’t even gone into the ground yet EVEN THOUGH windows had been changed and blocked up to change the appearance to the new plans, so why should these people be any different when they haven’t actually done anything construction wise, but now rush through unfinished plans etc as its last minute.

Also have they officially announced dropping phase 3 yet or have we negotiated this yet?

IF NOT, THEN I OPPOSE THIS STRONGLY as I did the last numerous applications they have tried to force through. Please advise what is going on with this as its getting rather boring and a waste of my taxpaying money by reissuing applications to all and sundry for a measly £500 fee. Your issue here is simple, tell them there is no extension and sell the land yourself to who you want to build and to your designs earning the Borough the most revenue – THIS IS YOUR RESPONSIBILITY you are now revenue generators not just spenders in light of the current severe cut backs. You have a duty to get the most revenue for Borough funds TRUE OR FALSE please advise.

11. 35 Haddon Close –

“How can I support or object to such a massive planning application which does not have a map attached, either in the letters received, posted on lamp-posts, or on this site? I object to the development on the grounds that it is impossible for me to reach a considered view, due to the paucity of detail supplied in your letter of 26/11/12 (FYI -received in the same borough 30/11/12 !!) and other sources.”

- 80 -

12. 7 Appleby Close –

“We strongly object that a professional development agency should have the right to apply for this. We, the immediately affected residents, have regularly been forced to accept changes of terms, deadline dates, application sources and projected changes to the "contracted details" of this development. Some of this constitutes "changing the goalposts" compared to what was designated by the Inspector at The Public Enquiry. If this failure to meet a stipulated deadline is agreed, then despite the enormous resources of the Developers we will once again prove helpless in the face Commercial Bullying. An agreed date is exactly that, and if not observed to the letter we will have been cheated, and be left wondering when and where the next non-compliance will occur.

In short, there is no case to answer, and no justification for an extension of time. We need the protection of an agreed time deadline, or by definition it is no longer the deadline it purports to be.”

13. 4 Appleby Close –

“I object to this planning application on the basis that the timescale, as set down in the Department of Communities and Local Government’s letter dated 23rd February 2010 granting the WP/2008/0150 planning application, is non- negotiable.

The 23rd February 2010 letter states:-

Formal decision

10. Accordingly, for the reasons set out above, and in his letter of 22 October 2009, the Secretary of State agrees with the Inspector’s recommendation. He hereby allows your client's appeal and grants outline planning permission for up to 3,000 dwellings, retail and commercial facilities, non-residential institutions (including primary schools and nurseries), a neighbourhood centre (comprising transport interchange, non-institutional and commercial facilities), open spaces and parkland, associated facilities and infrastructure (comprising utilities including gas, electricity, water, sewerage and telecommunications, and diversion to existing utilities where necessary) and a reserve corridor for the Isham-Wellingborough road improvement (IWIMP), on land off the A509 Niort Way and the A510 Northen Way and south of Great Harrowden, Wellingborough, NN8 4UF, in accordance with application number WP/2008/0150/OEIA dated 4 March 2008, subject to the conditions set out in Annex A to this letter.

Annex A – Conditions

Implementation Conditions

1. The applications for approval of all of the reserved matters in respect of Phase 1 (as defined by Parameter Plan H - Drawing Number BBD008/017.01/J) shall be made no later than the expiration of 3 years from the date of this permission…….. - 81 -

Thus, if the applicant is not prepared to accept the above timescale, they do not have planning permission.”

14. Objection from D Thorp -

“Unless something is done to the A509 from Wellingborough to Kettering then this surely can't go ahead. Adding another load of traffic to a road that's already way over congested is just crazy. The A509 Isham Bypass needs to built along with this development.”

15. 9 Chatsworth Drive –

“Regarding the planning application of 3000 dwellings. I am speaking for the local community regarding the proposed construction of 3000 dwellings and we are very disgruntled on how such a project can even be considered. 1) How the road infrastructure can cope in this area with several thousands more vehicles its like Russian roulette now when entering onto Niort Way wheather its from Gleneagles, Hardwick or Harrowden Road. 2) Whats going to become of our countryside swap it for a concrete jungle in years to come our childrens youngsters wont know what wild life / countryside is. 3) Please explain how local services ie Kettering hospital, public transport, employment, schooling are to be included in your plans because presently they cannot cope. 4)Could you also explain how this project benefits the Isham to Wellingborough Road all the traffic useing the new road going to be travelling along Niort Way too. 5) Whats to become of private estates off Gleneagles become a throughafare for traffic, and everybody else useing it for a shortcut to other areas of the town.”

ASSESSMENT: In determining any application of this type, the Council must consider whether there have been any material changes since the date of the extant permission to either policy or the application site and its environs that should influence that determination. The changes that might be material to the determination of this application are considered below. Planning Policy - Since the extant permission was granted in February 2010, the National Planning Policy Statements (PPSs) and earlier Planning Policy Guidance notes (PPGs) were replaced in March 2012 by the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF). However, the weight afforded to the East Midlands Regional Plan (2009) has reduced considerably, given the Government’s intention to revoke it. The North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy (2008) is being reviewed, but its forthcoming replacement has not yet reached Publication (Pre-Submission) stage; and the North Northamptonshire Biodiversity SPD was published in 2011.

The NPPF (March 2012) advises that development proposals that accord with an up-to- date Development Plan should be approved (para. 12), “without delay” (para. 14). In permitting the original outline application, the Secretary of State concluded that it is “not in conflict with the Development Plan” (para. 13 of his October 2009 decision letter), - 82 -

agreeing with the appeal inspector in this respect (para. 11.66 of his August 2009 report). Some three years later, the up-to-date elements of the Development Plan remain the East Midlands Regional Plan (2009) and the North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy (2008). Given the proposed development accords with these documents, as the inspector and Secretary of State found, we consider that the subject application can indeed be permitted without delay.

The NPPF also underlines the merits of larger scale developments, including urban extensions and mixed use developments (para. 52; also paras. 17 (9th bullet point), 39, 58 (3rd bullet point) and 69 (1st bullet point)). As a sustainable urban extension incorporating a mix of uses, the proposed development is of a form fully in accordance with these principles and priorities set out in the NPPF. The Government intends to revoke the East Midlands Regional Plan (2009), in common with its other Regional Spatial Strategies (RSSs). However, the case for North Wellingborough is not dependent upon the continued existence of the East Midlands Regional Plan, because the site is identified for a Sustainable Urban Extension in the adopted North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy.

The Review of that North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy remains at an early stage. The Emerging Draft for Consultation was issued in August 2012. This document confirms the intention of the North Northamptonshire authorities that Wellingborough should remain a Growth Town (as identified in the Core Strategy) and thereby continue to be a “focus for major growth” in North Northamptonshire (p.24). Furthermore, the document confirms the authorities’ intention that the Sustainable Urban Extensions identified in the Core Strategy should be regarded as development commitments, rather than the principle of their continued identification being re-visited within the scope of the Review (p.3, 4 and 12).

5-year Housing Supply - Paragraph 49 of the NPPF states that housing applications should be considered in the context of the presumption in favour of development. Figures produced by the NNJPU and the Borough Council and published in the North Northamptonshire Annual Monitoring Report December 2011 show that, at 1st April 2012, the Borough has a deliverable housing land supply of just 2.14 years, equating to a shortfall of over 3,100 dwellings over the 5 year period to 2016. In total 5,447 additional dwellings will be required over the next 5 year period. These figures already take into account and are based on the assumption of delivery of housing as part of the Wellingborough North approved Phase 1. Declining this application implies therefore that here will therefore be considerable difficulties in meeting the shortfall that has already been identified. In the circumstances, there is a pressing need for additional housing land within the Borough to help reduce the identified shortfall and meet the housing needs of the community.

Sustainable Growth and Community Benefits - At the heart of the new national framework is the presumption in favour of sustainable development which should be seen as the golden thread running through both plan-making and decision-making (Paragraph 14). The sustainability credentials of the application site are well established, in view of the designation in the Core Strategy as suitable for urban extension and the decision by the Secretary of State to consent the application. The proposed development will provide a range of high quality and sustainable new homes within easy walking and cycling distance of services and facilities. Furthermore, the - 83 - development will also secure a range of significant community benefits through planning obligations.

Environmental Impact - The ecological surveys and the consequent mitigation and enhancement proposals supporting the original application comply fully with the requirements set out in the North Northamptonshire Biodiversity SPD (2011).

In response to the Council’s request that an update of the original survey work be done, Wardell Armstrong LLP undertook a habitat survey of the site and its immediate environs on 29 October 2012. This survey broadly followed the techniques outlined in the Joint Nature Conservation Committee’s Handbook for Phase 1 Habitat Survey (2010). The purpose of this survey was to review and update the previous habitat survey that was undertaken in support of the original application in November 2008.

The October 2012 survey re-confirmed that the site largely comprises arable fields and species poor hedgerows, mature trees and some areas of grassland. The survey found that the habitats have not significantly changed since the previous survey and the Habitat Plan and Hedgerow Assessment drawings (figures 7.1 and 7.2 in the 2008 Environmental Statement respectively) therefore remain valid and do not need any alteration.

As well as updating the Transport Assessment, the applicant has also produced a Utilities Statement. Both these documents confirm that the transport and utilities strategies agreed in connection with the original application remain appropriate. This conclusion is informed by the fact that other development proposals permitted within the Borough since 2010 (the date of the extant permission) have been small in scale, thereby having limited impact on North Wellingborough. These appended documents confirm that there have been no significant changes to transport conditions or utilities circumstances in the site’s environs since 2008-10. More generally, there have been no other significant changes affecting the site or its environs in these recent years.

Conclusion For all these reasons, the Environmental Statement supporting the original application remains relevant. In particular, there is no requirement for any further formal Environmental Information to be submitted in order for the Environmental Statement to satisfy the Environmental Impact Assessment Regulations 2011. The subject application can be permitted on the basis of the submitted Environmental Statement, the other documentation supporting the original application and this Update Statement.

RECOMMENDATION: Grant outline permission subject to the following conditions save for condition 5 which is proposed to be deleted if the Committee resolves to approve the submitted Design Code. The conditions are the same as those contained in the Secretary of State’s letter dated 23 February 2010.

1. The applications for approval of all of the reserved matters in respect of Phase 1 (as defined by Parameter Plan H - Drawing Number BBD008/017.01/J) shall be made no later than the expiration of 2 years from the date of this permission, and the development to which this permission relates in respect of Phase 1 shall - 84 -

commence before the later of: (a) The expiration of a period of 5 years from the date of this permission; or (b) The expiration of 2 years from the date of the final approval of the details of the last reserved matter given by the local planning authority or, in the case of approval on different dates, the final approval of the last such matter to be approved. 2. The applications for approval of the reserved matters in respect of Phases 2 and 3 (as defined by Parameter Plans I and J - Drawing Numbers BBD008/017.02/J and BBD008/017.03/J) shall be made no later than the expiration of 10 years from the date of this permission, and the development to which this permission relates in respect of Phases 2 and 3 shall commence before the later of: (a) The expiration of a period of 12 years from the date of this permission; or (b) The expiration of 5 years from the date of the final approval of the details of the last reserved matter (for phases 2 and 3) given by the local planning authority or, in the case of approval on different dates, the final approval of the last such matter to be approved. 2A Notwithstanding conditions 2 and 5A of this permission, no development shall commence within Phases 2 and 3 (as defined by Parameter Plans I and J - Drawing Numbers BBD008/017.02/J and BBD008/017.03/J) until development has commenced in Phase 1 pursuant to condition 1 of this permission. 3. Notwithstanding condition 2 above, no dwellings within Phases 2 and 3 (as defined by Parameter Plans I and J - Drawing Numbers BBD008/017.02/J and BBD008/017.03/J) shall be occupied until the IWIMP road has been completed and brought into use. 4. Applications for detailed approval of the following matters (hereby referred to as the reserved matters) in relation to any phase of development shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority before the commencement of development in that phase (save such preliminary work as the local planning authority may approve in writing): (a) the layout, scale and appearance of buildings; (b) vehicle, cycle and foot access routes and parking; (c) hard and soft landscaping including boundary treatments and details of street furniture and lighting; (d) layout and design of public open space; The development shall thereafter be implemented in accordance with the approved details. 4A Application for detailed approval of the following matters in relation to any phase of development shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority before the commencement of development in relation to that phase: (a) layout, design and specification of drainage infrastructure; (b) detailed survey of existing ground levels, details of any proposed alterations to the existing ground levels, the final ground level of the development and the finished floor levels of the buildings; and (c) waste management facilities strategy and waste audit, including arrangements for the provision of waste collection receptacles. The development shall thereafter be implemented in accordance with the approved details. 5. No reserved matters application shall be submitted for development in relation to any phase of development unless a design code (including schedules of external - 85 -

facing materials for all the buildings) covering that application has been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. Such design code to be submitted to the local planning authority for approval shall consist of guidance and coding relating to the following matters for that application: character area overview; public realm strategy; movement network including route hierarchy, street, building and block typologies; open spaces and landscape; environmental standards; and implementation. The development shall thereafter be implemented in accordance with the approved design code details. 5A No development shall commence on any phase or sub-phase until a phasing plan in respect of the phased implementation of the development in phases and/or sub-phases, which shall generally be in accordance with the principles set out in Parameter Plans H, I and J submitted with the application (Drawing nos. BBD008/017.01/J, BBD008/017.02/J and BBD008/017.03/J), have been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. In particular, the phasing plan for Phase 1 of the development shall: (a) identify the nature, scale and extent of the infrastructure to be provided to serve the development within Phase 1; (b) identify play and sports facilities, including formal and informal open space, to serve 1,500 dwellings within Phase 1, including the formal sports facilities adjacent to Wellingborough Grange Farm and the timing for its delivery; (c) incorporate the central phase of Brook Park and the Harrowden Ridge Park central phase and the timing for its delivery; (d) identify the extent of the neighbourhood centre to be associated with Phase 1 and timing for its delivery; (e) identify the extent of the woodland planting to be associated with Phase 1 and the timing for its delivery including advance planting on the northern and eastern edges of Redhill Grange. The development shall be implemented in accordance with the phasing plan and programme so approved. 6. Each reserved matters application shall substantially accord with the Planning Application Masterplan (drawing numbered BBD008/010BC) and the approved Design Codes and shall be accompanied by a written statement which demonstrates compliance. 7. The development hereby permitted shall be carried out substantially in compliance with the Parameter Plans contained in the Planning Application, namely Drawing nos. BBD008/043, 010/BC, 012/AB, 014/U, 015/T, 016/P, 029/F, 017.01/J, 017.02/J and 017.03/J, and save as is necessary to secure compliance with the conditions on this permission, no variation shall be made without the prior written approval of the local planning authority which approval will not be given if in the reasonable opinion of the local planning authority the proposed variation creates new environmental impacts which exceed the range or scale of those assessed and measured in the Environmental Statement (including the further information submitted in October 2008) and which the local planning authority considers may require further or additional mitigation - 86 -

measures. 8. The total number of C3 dwelling units within the development shall be limited to 3,000. Of that total, 1,500 units shall be limited to Phase 1,700 units for Phase 2 and 800 units for Phase 3. Notwithstanding the foregoing, sub-phases of the development may be carried out subject to the limits specified for each phase both individually and cumulatively not being exceeded. 9. Prior to the commencement of the development of any phase, sub-phase or infrastructure element in connection with any phase (save for such preliminary works as the local planning authority may approve in writing), all existing public rights of way affected by the development of that phase, sub-phase or infrastructure element shall be protected and/or diverted in accordance with statutory procedures and a scheme which shall previously have been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. Such measures shall remain in place for the duration of the construction in that phase, sub-phase or infrastructure element and thereafter, any such route shall be returned to its original state or such state as shall be approved in writing in advance by the local planning authority, and made available for public use once the works which immediately affect them have been completed. 10. Prior to the commencement of any development (save for such preliminary works as the local planning authority may approve in writing), a structural landscape scheme shall be provided in accordance with an updated version of the Landscape Strategy (September 2008) and submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. A detailed scheme for each element shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The scheme(s) shall be implemented in the first planting season immediately following the completion of the relevant phase or sub-phase or within any longer period as may be agreed in writing with the local planning authority. If, within a period of 5 years from the date of the planting, any tree or plant is removed, uprooted, destroyed or dies, another of the same species and size shall be planted at the same place in the next available planting season, unless the local planning authority gives its written consent to any variation. For the purposes of this condition a planting season shall be the period from the end of October to the end of February. 11. Prior to the commencement of any development within any phase (save for such preliminary works as the local planning authority may approve in writing), a detailed plan shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority indicating the position of existing landscape features including trees, large shrubs and hedges both within that phase and overhanging the phase boundary. Trees are to be assessed for their wildlife value and potential for providing bat roosts. The extent of the canopy shall be plotted accurately and the plan shall specify protective measures to existing trees and hedges to be retained on that part of the phase in accordance with British Standard 5837. The plan shall also indicate the proposed route of all underground services and measures to be taken to ensure that root damage is avoided. The approved measures shall be implemented prior to development of the phase area or infrastructure element to which it relates (save for such preliminary works as the local planning authority may approve in writing) and retained until the completion of the development. Any land so enclosed shall be kept clear of all materials, machinery and temporary buildings at all times.

- 87 -

12. A Landscape Management Plan, including phasing and implementation strategy, management responsibilities and maintenance arrangements for all landscape areas, other than privately owned domestic gardens, shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority as part of the reserved matters submission in accordance with Conditions 4 and 10. The Landscape Management Plan shall be implemented as approved. 13. The development of each phase, sub-phase or infrastructure element hereby permitted shall not commence until a programme of archaeological work in accordance with a written scheme of investigation (including site-based archaeological survey, trial fieldworks to evaluate the archaeological potential of the sub-area and any work necessary to preserve remains in situ and/or by record), or watching brief, as appropriate, has been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority for that phase, sub-phase or infrastructure element. The relevant works shall only take place in accordance with the detailed scheme or brief pursuant to this condition. 14. The development of each phase or sub-phase shall not commence (save for such preliminary works as the local planning authority may approve in writing) until a scheme for noise mitigation measures in relation to that phase or sub- phase, in accordance with the Environmental Statement, to protect future occupiers from the industrial operations within Finedon Road Industrial Estate has been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The approved mitigation measures shall be implemented in full prior to the first occupation of any building in that phase or sub-phase. 15. No development of any phase or sub-phase shall take place until a Construction Management Plan has been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The Construction Management Plan shall include and specify the provision to be made for the following: (i) Dust mitigation measures during the construction period; (ii) Control of noise emanating from the site during the construction period; (iii) Hours of construction work for the development; (iv) Contractors' compounds and other storage arrangements; (v) Enclosure of phase or sub-phase development sites; (vi) Provision for all site operatives, visitors and construction vehicles loading, off loading, parking and turning within the site during the construction period; (vii) Arrangements during the construction period to minimise the deposit of mud and other similar debris on the adjacent public highways; (viii) Routing agreement for construction traffic. The construction of the development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved Construction Management Plan. 16. Prior to the commencement of development on any phase or infrastructure element (save for such preliminary works as the local planning authority may approve in writing), a lighting strategy shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The details shall thereafter be implemented in accordance with the approved strategy. 17. The development hereby permitted shall not be commenced (save for such preliminary works as the local planning authority may approve in writing) until such time as a scheme to provide detailed suitable modelling of the watercourse through the site (Harrowden Brook) to the limits of the site boundaries (to allow the fluvial flood risk contours from the modelled 1 in 100 year and 1 in 1,000 year flood events to be mapped), has been submitted to and approved in writing by - 88 -

the local planning authority. The scheme shall be fully implemented and subsequently maintained in accordance with the timing/phasing arrangements embodied within the scheme or within any other period as may subsequently be approved in writing by the local planning authority. 18. Prior to the commencement of any development (save for such preliminary works as the local planning authority may approve in writing), a Stage 2 Flood Risk Assessment shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by, the local planning authority. The scheme shall be fully implemented and subsequently maintained in accordance with the timing/phasing arrangements embodied within the scheme or within any other period as may subsequently be approved in writing by the local planning authority. 19. Notwithstanding the provisions of sections 94, 98 and 106 of the Water Industry Act 1991, no development shall commence (save for such preliminary works as the local planning authority may approve in writing) until details of a scheme, including phasing, for the provision of mains foul water drainage on and off site has been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. No dwellings shall be occupied until the works have been carried out in accordance with the approved scheme. 20. Prior to the commencement of the development of any phase or sub-phase, a scheme for the disposal of surface water from that phase or sub-phase shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. Such a scheme shall adopt sustainable drainage principles in accordance with the principles of sustainable drainage systems set out in Appendix F of PPS25 and shall not result in an increase in the rate and/or volume of surface water discharge to the local land drainage system. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved scheme(s). 21. If, during development, contamination not previously identified is found to be present at the site then no further development shall be carried out until the developer has submitted, and obtained written approval from the local planning authority for, an amendment to the remediation strategy detailing how this unsuspected contamination shall be dealt with. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved amendment to the remediation strategy. 22. In accordance with the submitted development phasing plan, residential units delivered between 2008-2012 shall achieve as a minimum Code for Sustainable Homes ("CSH") Level 3; residential units delivered 2013-2015 shall achieve as a minimum CSH Level 4; and those delivered from 2016 onwards shall be achieve CSH Level 6, (or the equivalent national standard which replaces the Code for Sustainable Homes which is to be the assessment in force when the residential units concerned are registered for assessment purposes). 23. Non-residential buildings shall achieve a minimum of Building Research Establishment Environment Assessment Method (BREEAM) level "very good" (or the equivalent standard which replaces the Building Research Establishment Environmental Assessment Method which is to be the assessment in force when the Commercial Unit or Units concerned are registered for assessment purposes). 24. All reserved matters applications shall be accompanied by a Sustainability Statement/Assessment that demonstrates how environmental sustainability issues have been addressed during the design process and sets out the way in which the credits under relevant BREEAM Rating and relevant CSH Level will be - 89 -

achieved based on the actual design of the commercial units or residential units (as appropriate) in the particular development parcel. The development shall be implemented in accordance with the approved details unless otherwise approved in writing by the local planning authority. 25. Prior to the commencement of development (save for such preliminary works as the local planning authority may approve in writing) a Low/Zero Carbon (LZC) Feasibility Study shall be carried out by an independent energy specialist to establish the most appropriate LZC energy source for the development in order achieve a target of at least 30% of the demand for energy. The feasibility study should cover as a minimum; energy generated by LZC source per year, payback, land use, noise, whole life cost impact of potential specification in terms of carbon emissions, any available grants, all technologies appropriate to the site, energy demand of the development, reasons for excluding other technologies and should include technical and economic viability assessment supporting actual target if less than 30%. The Study shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority and the development shall be implemented in accordance with the approved Study. 26. In relation to the Class A1 use of the Town and Country Planning (Use Classes) Order 2005 (as amended or any equivalent class within an Order revoking and or re-enacting that Order with or without modification) proposed on site pursuant to this permission, the cumulative/total gross floor area shall not exceed 2,600 square metres without the prior written consent of the local planning authority. 27. Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995 (or any other Order revoking and or re- enacting this Order with or without modification), any class A2, A3, A4 and A5 building/uses shall not be used for retail purposes falling within Class A1 of the Town and Country Planning (Use Classes) Order 2005 (as amended or any equivalent class within an Order revoking and or re-enacting that Order with or without modification) without the prior written consent of the local planning authority. 28. Before any part of the development hereby permitted is commenced, a detailed Development Phasing Plan for all highway and access works shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The Development Phasing Plan shall be in accordance with the Phasing Plan submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority pursuant to Condition 5A of this permission. All highway and access works shall be implemented in accordance with the approved Development Phasing Plan. 29. Notwithstanding the plans and details submitted, prior to the commencement of any phase or sub-phase of the development hereby permitted, details of the highway and access works necessary as part of that phase or sub-phase shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. All highway and access works in that phase or sub-phase shall thereafter be implemented in accordance with the approved details and phased in accordance with the Development Phasing Plan. 30. Before any part of the development hereby permitted is commenced, the applicant shall undertake public consultation with residents of Redhill Grange concerning any alterations to the existing access arrangements or creation of a new access or accesses to the estate at Redhill Grange. The results of the consultation shall be considered by the applicant and where appropriate taken account of in the subsequent detailed reserved matters application submissions - 90 -

pursuant to this permission. 31. Notwithstanding the plans submitted, all roads, footpaths, cycleways and verges within the development and linking to it shall be designed and constructed in accordance with details to be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. Details shall accord with the standards contained within the Northamptonshire County Council document 'Place and Movement Guide' and be supported by a Quality Audit. 32. Before any part of the development hereby permitted is commenced, a Walking and Cycling Audit shall be submitted to and approved in writing by local planning authority. No development shall be commenced until details of the Walking and Cycling Measures arising from the Audit, which for the avoidance of doubt shall include measures such as dropped kerbs, tactile paving and controlled pedestrian/cycle crossing(s) and signage to be carried out within the public highway that reasonably relate to the proposed development along with a programme of delivery, have been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. Such Walking and Cycling Measures shall be carried out in accordance with the approved programme of delivery.

- 91 - Olawale Duyile Principal Development Management Officer T: 01933 231 935 F: 01933 231 982 E: [email protected]

Heather Pugh - Partner Date: 17 October 2012 David Lock Associates 50 North Thirteenth Street Your Ref: MCL002/HP/aw Central Milton Keynes MK9 3BP Our Ref: WP/2008/0150/OEIA

Dear Heather

TOWN & COUNTRY PLANNING ACT 1990 (AS AMENDED) TOWN & COUNTRY PLANNING (GENERAL DEVELOPMENT PROCEDURE) ORDER TOWN & COUNTRY PLANNING (DEVELOPMENT MANAGEMENT PROCEDURE) (ENGLAND) ORDER 2010 TOWN AND COUNTRY PLANNING (ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT)(ENGLAND AND WALES) REGULATIONS 2011

SCOPE OF INTENDED APPLICATION TO EXTEND THE TIME LIMITS FOR THE IMPLEMENTATION THE EXTANT OUTLINE CONSENT LAND OFF THE A509 NIORT WAY AND THE A510 NORTHEN WAY AND SOUTH OF GREAT HARROWDEN, WELLINGBOROUGH, NN8 4UF

I am in receipt of your letter dated 10 October 2012 regarding the above and the outline consent granted by the Secretary of State for Communities & Local Government by letter dated 23 February 2012 for: development up to 3,000 dwellings, retail and commercial facilities, non-residential institutions (including primary schools and nurseries), a neighbourhood centre (comprising transport interchange, non-institutional and commercial facilities), open spaces and parkland, associated facilities and infrastructure (comprising utilities including gas, electricity, water, sewerage and telecommunications, and diversion to existing utilities where necessary) and a reserve corridor for the Isham- Wellingborough road improvement (IWIMP).

I note the applicant’s intention to extend the time limits for the implementation of the consent and acknowledge that recent legislative provisions set out in the Chief Planner’s letter of 17 September 2012 make allowance for this.

Requisite Information to be submitted in support of the application In the Guidance issued by the Department for Communities & Local Government in October 2009, it is stated that it is open to Local Planning Authorities to seek further information in support of the application, for example if the proposal is an environmental impact assessment (EIA) scheme and the Local Planning Authority considers that the environmental statement (ES) submitted with the previous application requires updating, or is no longer sufficient because there is - 92 - reason to believe that the likely significant environmental impacts have changed. Applicants may additionally wish to provide supporting information setting out why they are seeking an extension, or addressing any changes in policy or other material considerations which may have occurred since the previous grant of permission, if these are relevant to the proposal. Except in cases where there is a need to comply with a statutory requirement in connection with the submission of the application, or a relevant change in policy or other material considerations which post-date the original application, it is not anticipated that any information additional to that which must be provided on the application form will be required in most circumstances.

Design & Access Statement / Planning Statement: In the light of the foregoing and as you have rightly pointed out in your letter, there have been material changes in circumstances to allow for changes to be made to certain documents that accompanied the original planning application. I concede that changes need not be made to the Design & Access Statement, but the Planning Statement has to be amended to take account of the provisions in the new National Planning Policy Framework; those in the emerging development plan and other material considerations.

Transport Assessment & Utilities Statements: There can be no doubt that in the intervening period, between February 2010, when consent was given by the Secretary of State and now, there have been material changes to existing and projected traffic generation in the area, due in part to the consented schemes for residential and non-residential development. An update statement on transport issues is therefore a necessity. This should outline any change in the projected rate of background traffic growth relative to the projected rate at the time of the original application, and whether any permitted development in the area since 2010 have had an impact in patterns of traffic movements that would result in a material change in the agreed transport strategy and triggers for Upper Redhill. An update statement on utilities, reviewing whether any permitted development in the area since 2010 has had a material impact on delivery of utilities capacity for Upper Redhill will also be required.

Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) & Environmental Statement (ES) Paragraph 14 of the October 2009 Guidance states: An application for an extension to the time limit is considered to be a new application for development consent under the 1999 EIA Regulations, and requires a planning authority to issue a new screening opinion whether EIA is necessary where the proposed development is listed under Schedules 1, or 2 where it satisfies the criteria or thresholds set to the 1999 EIA Regulations. In the majority of cases where EIA was carried out on the original application, further information to make the environmental statement satisfy the requirements of the EIA Regulations is unlikely to be required.

- 93 -

Whilst I accept that there have been no material changes in the development plan and National Guidance since the original consent was issued, I will adopt the same approach in relation to transport assessment and utility statements in that an update statement on the ES is required, taking account of the permitted development in the area since 2010 and whether or not these have a material impact on environmental conditions and other characteristics that were scoped in the original EIA and ES. If the update statements imply that the impacts are significant, then a supplementary statement that sets out the proposed mitigation is also necessary.

Landscape / Ecological & Services Assessments: I concur that on site surveys for landscape, ecology and services submitted with the original outline application did not raise issues of overriding significance, and mitigation and enhancement of existing habitats, features and services were built into the outline design approved in 2010 with conditions governing further detailed information required prior to commencement of development. Nevertheless I consider that the intervening 3 years are significant and a fresh ecological survey of the area is necessary with a view to identifying any new habitats and protected species. If new habitats or species are evident, I agree that these could be addressed through amendments to the conditions on the original consent or the imposition of new ones.

Other Matters: I welcome the submission of a draft Heads of Terms for a simple deed to supplement the Unilateral Undertaking accompanying the original permission.

I trust the foregoing is of assistance. I can be contacted on the above number if you require further clarification in these matters.

Yours sincerely

Olawale Duyile Principal Development Management Officer

- 94 -

BOROUGH COUNCIL OF WELLINGBOROUGH

OTHER BOROUGH/COUNTY

Planning Committee 19/12/2012

Report of the Head of Planning and Local Development

APPLICATION REF: WP/2012/0495/C

PROPOSAL: Application to increase the efficiency of on site operations with an additional access point, increase operating hours and extend life of the site.

LOCATION: Sewage Works, A45 Nene Valley Way, Ecton, Northampton.

APPLICANT: Mr John Gough, Mick George Limited.

NOTE: Decision on matter deferred pending meeting with Health officers.

16. APPLICATION OUTSIDE THE BOROUGH

2. WP/2012/0495(C)

The annexed circulated report of the Head of Planning and Local Development was received on planning application WP/2012/0495(C), including late correspondence, for an application to increase the efficiency of on site operations with an additional access point, increase operating hours and extend life of the site at Sewage Works, A45 Nene Valley Way, Ecton for Mr J Gough.

The report set out details of the proposal, a description of the site, the planning history, relevant planning policies and an assessment of the proposal.

The Principal Planning and Building Control Officer reported that a meeting will take place on the site on 22/11/2012 with the applicant and Environmental Health Officers to give a better understanding of the existing and proposed operations. It was therefore recommended to defer the application until after the meeting takes place.

It was proposed by Councillor Ward and seconded by Councillor Scarborough that this matter be deferred pending the meeting on 22/11/2012.

RESOLVED that this matter be deferred pending the meeting on 22/11/2012. WP/2012/0495/C - 95 -

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

BOROUGH COUNCIL OF WELLINGBOROUGH

Planning Committee 21/11/2012

Report of the Head Planning and Local Development

APPLICATION REF: WP/2012/0495/C

PROPOSAL: Application to increase the efficiency of on site operations with an additional access point, increase operating hours and extend life of the site.

LOCATION: Sewage Works, A45 Nene Valley Way, Ecton, Northampton.

APPLICANT: Mr John Gough, Mick George Limited.

NOTE: This is an application to Northamptonshire County Council. Wellingborough Borough Council is a consultee.

Applicant describes proposal as follows:-

“Section 38 of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004, requires that when in determining any planning application, regard is to be made to the development plan and that determination shall be made in accordance with the development plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise. In the case of the continued operations at the Great Billing site the key documents to consider are the Core Strategy (adopted May 2010) Location of Waste Development (March 2011) and the Control and Management of Development document (adopted June 2011).

The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) was published in March 2012 and the Introductory paragraph 5 confirms that document does not contain specific waste policies since these were addressed within the National Waste Management Plan for England.

The key planning document for waste in England remains PPS10 - Planning for Sustainable Waste Management (which was not superseded by the NPPF) and establishes key principles and of particular significance is the need to drive waste management up the waste hierarchy, addressing waste as a resource, and looking to disposal as the last option but nevertheless one which must be adequately catered for. PPS10 includes a number of other key objectives that regional and local planning bodies should address. The Government’s Waste Strategy 2007 is also of relevance as it sets the waste management context - 96 -

which planning policy has to have reference to. This strategy builds on the aims of the National Waste Strategy 2000 to minimise waste and encourages the recycling, composting and recovery of waste.

The Regional Plan sets a minimum target for recycling and composting of municipal solid waste and is supported by the Regional Waste Strategy (RWS), which although required to be prepared is not a statutory document. It contains principles which include working toward zero growth in waste by 2016 and exceeding Government targets for recycling and composting recovery on the basis that technology in this area is developing very quickly. The RWS was issued in January 2006 and has been used to inform the approach to the MWDF and it identifies apportionments of the waste management capacity required for the three main waste streams by sub-region for the period until 2020. The total quantities are split into categories of recycling/composting requirements, landfill diversion, re-use and disposal. The RWS assumes recycling rates for municipal waste in line with the Regional Plan.

Planning consent was originally granted in April 2006 for the change of use of land within the curtilage of the Great Billing Sewage Treatment Works to establish a waste transfer station that would handle non hazardous and inert waste. That planning consent was time limited until March 2015 and also restricted operations from Monday to Saturday inclusive between 0700 and 1800 hours. Planning consent was subsequently approved in February 2007 which additionally allowed the processing of minerals and inert waste to generate secondary aggregate and in April 2008 consent was granted for an additional building. Mick George Ltd have a program of continual improvement of operational facilities wherever practicable to do so and in case of the site at Great Billing it is proposed to handle waste in a more efficient manner by having a separate entrance and exit points from the internal access road. It is also proposed to extend the operational hours (to include Sundays and Bank Holiday) and the life of the transfer station until 2025. Furthermore consent is being sought to handle Commercial, Industrial and Household Waste.

The facility is strategically located close to the A45 and then the waste material will be reloaded into heavy commercial vehicles which will then transfer the material to the Company’s permanent offsite re-cycling facility at the Storefield Lodge Waste Management Park at Rushton. The site has now operated successfully and without complaints for several years handling a wide range of wastes which are sorted or recycled consistent with local and national waste strategies.”

RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that no objection is raised.

- 97 -

19th December 2012

PLANNING COMMITTEE

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

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

WP/2012/0380/F Mr Chandrakant Patel 47 Thrush Lane, AC Wellingborough. Retention of single storey shed to the rear of the property.

WP/2012/0395/FCOU Islah Ul Muslimeen Polish Club, 35 Winstanley AC Road, Wellingborough. Change of use from social club to D1 (Place of worship and community centre).

WP/2012/0411/F Mr and Mrs L Fowler 30 Hookhams Path, AC Wollaston. Erection of a detached 2- storey dwelling house (Re- submission following the refusal of WP/2012/0332/F).

WP/2012/0421/F Mr R Furness 1 Eastlands Road, Finedon. AC Proposal to build a new bungalow. Amended Plan.

WP/2012/0424/F Mr Ramesh Patel 120 Highfield Road, AC Wellingborough. Erection of a single storey rear extension.

WP/2012/0425/F Mr Neil Mcdonald 6 Vicarage Lane, AC Stonewell Design and Build Mears Ashby. Limited The existing ground floor extension is to be replaced with a new two storey extension to the side of the property and a new front porch.

WP/2012/0432/F Mr James Lawson The Nursery, 1 Isham Road, AC Orlingbury. Construction of 2 detached houses with garages.

- 98 -

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

WP/2012/0435/F Mr David Bletsoe-Brown 79 Ecton Lane, Sywell. AC Construction of detached stables with ancillary grooms' accommodation over and ancillary works.

WP/2012/0439/AV Mr Nick Shelton Unit 12-14, 37 Regent Park, AC Print Data Solutions Booth Drive, Wellingborough. Display of free standing non- illuminated 1.5m high x 1.5m wide sign which will display the company name and logo.

WP/2012/0440/LB Mr William Linnell Wilby Cottage, APPROVED Linnell Properties 136 Main Road, Wilby. Replacement of bathroom window (Application for a Listed Building Consent).

WP/2012/0442/F Mr and Mrs Lee Underwood 103 High Street, Irchester. AC Erection of a two storey rear extension. Amended Plans.

WP/2012/0444/F Mr Jonah Clarke 34 Hatton Avenue, AC Wellingborough. Removal of 1m high fence on Hatton Avenue boundary to be replaced by 1.8m high brick wall with wrought iron inserts.

WP/2012/0446/F Marks and Spencer PLC Marks and Spencer, AC 22 London Road, Wellingborough. Siting of 2 no. refrigerated storage containers between 1st November and 31 January annually.

WP/2012/0448/F Mr L Gallacher Wellingborough School, AC Wellingborough School Irthlingborough Road, Wellingborough. Removal of the existing dilapidated fence at the boundary of the school with London Road. Vertical bar fence 1.4m in height.

- 99 -

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

WP/2012/0454/F Marks and Spencer PLC Marks and Spencer, APPROVED 22 London Road, Wellingborough. Installation of 1 no. condensing unit and 1 no. generator within rear plant compound and associated gas cylinder bottle cage.

WP/2012/0456/F Mr Brian Henson Land between 17 and 31 AC Queens Road, Wollaston. Proposed new 5 bedroom house - amended plans.

WP/2012/0460/AV Tesco Stores Limited Tesco Stores Limited, AC 27 35 Whitworth Way, Wellingborough. Proposed signage to Click and Collect facility.

WP/2012/0461/TX Mr Paul King Land rear of 30 High Street, AC Wellingborough. Application for a new planning permission to replace an extant planning permission in order to extend the time limit for implementation for WP/2009/0409/F - 8 no. retirement apartments, secure refuse and cycle store together with parking and associated works.

WP/2012/0462/TXLB Mr Paul King Land rear of 30 High Street, AC Wellingborough. Application for a new Listed Building Consent to replace an extant Listed Building Consent, in order to extend the time limit for implementation for WP/2009/0410/LB - Alterations to the listed wall. (Application for Listed Building Consent).

- 100 -

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

WP/2012/0463/F Mrs Clare Pipkin 21 Ash Close, Irchester. AC Two storey side extension, existing garage to be demolished.

WP/2012/0475/F Mrs L Moses 20 Denford Way, AC Wellingborough. Extension - Revised scheme following approval of WP/2012/0404/F.

WP/2012/0477/F Mr S Demeril 51 Mears Ashby Road, AC Earls Barton. Extensions to sides and rear (re-design of previous approval WP/2009/0087) and porch to front.

WP/2012/0478/F Mrs Julie Aitken 27 Wellingborough Road, AC Buds and Blooms Finedon. Use of garage attached to existing flower shop to be converted into small retail sweet shop sharing all facilities including minor amendments to shop front.

WP/2012/0480/NMA Mr Paul Wright 89 Eastfield Road, APPROVED Wellingborough. Non material amendment to WP/2012/0103 - amendment to front extension to include lead dressed pitched roof.

WP/2012/0486/F Mr Alan Sutherland 33 Sywell Avenue, APPROVED Wellingborough. First floor rear extension forming bedroom extensions, plus en-suite bathroom.

WP/2012/0487/NMA Mr John Patterson Home Farm, APPROVED PD Architectural Services 5 and 27 Knuston Road, Wellingborough. Non material amendment to Listed Building Consent WP/2011/0160/LB - Alterations to windows in barn 2 as shown on drawings.

- 101 -

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

WP/2012/0501/NMA Mr J Brown (Land at junction of Manor APPROVED C/o Agent Close and Dychurch Lane) Manor Farm, 7 Dychurch Lane, Bozeat. Non material amendment to WP/2011/0366/F - change to plan RF-11-1426 A (which shows a small area of landscaping) to driveway in order that it matches plan RF- 10-1421 A.

WP/2012/0507/NMA Mr and Mrs T Fletcher Land rear of 113 APPROVED Doddington Road, Earls Barton. Application for a non-material amendment to planning permission WP/2011/0459 involving minor alterations to elevations and internal layout of dwelling - house to be constructed in accordance with plan PU1832/05.

BACKGROUND PAPERS

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

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

- 102 -

PLANNING COMMITTEE - BUILDING REGULATION DECISIONS ISSUED APPLICATIONS DEALT WITH

APPLICATION DECISIONS BOROUGH OF WELLINGBOROUGH Date: 29/11/2012

Application No. Name & Address Description

FP/2012/3375/ Mr and Mrs Odell The creation of a new extension to York Road the rear of the existing property and APPROVED C Wollaston the construction of a new side Wellingborough extension over the existing garage.

BN/2012/3555/ Mr Ted Lowe Re roof - thermal upgrade. Valley Road ACCEPTED Wellingborough

BN/2012/3556/ Mrs Victoria Golley-Male Garage conversion. Wentworth Avenue ACCEPTED Wellingborough

BN/2012/3558/ Mrs Elizabeth Brett-Pitt Change of use of garage to Gretton Court habitable living area for purpose of ACCEPTED Wellingborough dining room. Work to include a bay front to fall in line with the lounge on the other side of the front door.

FP/2012/3559/ Mr K Jefferson Single storey rear extension. Queen Street APPROVED Bozeat Wellingborough - 103 -

Application No. Name & Address Description

BN/2012/3560/ Mr A R Brookes Refurbishment of the existing flat Orchard Hill and office/flat, alteration of ACCEPTED Little Billing staircase and new door. Northampton

FP/2012/3561/ Miss Denise Sewell Proposed loft conversion with flat Wollaston Road roof dormer to rear. APPROVED Irchester Wellingborough

BN/2012/3615/ Mr Stanyer Re slating main roof. St Barnabas Street ACCEPTED Wellingborough

BN/2012/3617/ Mr Lancaster Re-roof. Valley Road ACCEPTED Wellingborough

FP/2012/3619/ Mr Reuben Leach Outhouse/garage conversion to The Headlands enlarge kitchen area. APPROVED Wellingborough

BN/2012/3621/ Mr Phillip Johnson Extension to rear of property. Northampton Road ACCEPTED Wellingborough - 104 -

Application No. Name & Address Description

BN/2012/3714/ Morcon Foundations Limited Piled raft underpin to garages.

ACCEPTED

BN/2012/3715/ Morag Kindred Thermal insulation to bathroom/ Abbey Road kitchen. Structural opening to ACCEPTED Wellingborough kitchen.

BN/2012/3727/ Mr S Eady Re-roof. Thermal upgrade. Valley Road ACCEPTED Wellingborough

BN/2012/3793/ Mrs K O'Reilly Garage conversion. Serve Close ACCEPTED Wellingborough

BN/2012/3794/ Mr Arnold Dobbs New house build. Peartree Close ACCEPTED Bozeat

PS/2012/3795/ West Berkshire Council Reinstatement of fire damaged roof. Market Street APPROVED Newbury - 105 -

Application No. Name & Address Description

WI/2012/3798/ Mr S Bridger Replacement windows (upstairs Queensway bedroom southside and rear ACCEPTED Wellingborough bedroom south east corner).

BN/2012/3800/ Mr Russell Valentine Insert french doors to rear wall in Eastfield Road lieu of door and window. Remove ACCEPTED Wellingborough internal pantry and toilet wall on ground floor. Remove wall between kitchen and dining room. Move hall doorway to dining room. Rewire central heating. Replace windows. New bath suite. Re-slate.

DI/2012/3801/ Mrs C Taylor Conversion of bathroom into a Finedon Road shower room. ACCEPTED Wellingborough

BN/2012/3802/ Kathryn Garden Wall removal (insertion of three Hatton Avenue lintels). ACCEPTED Wellingborough

BN/2012/3803/ Mr Nick Shelton Remove kitchen/dining wall. Grendon Road Remove dining/lounge wall. ACCEPTED Wollaston Replace existing windows with new UPVC.

BN/2012/3825/ Mr John Tinston New structural opening between Swanspool Parade two rear ground floor rooms. ACCEPTED Wellingborough - 106 -

Application No. Name & Address Description

BN/2012/3880/ Mr Paul Chadwick Garage conversion for downstairs Harrison Close accommodation; shower room/toilet ACCEPTED Wellingborough and utility area.

BN/2012/3881/ Mr Patrick Re-roof. Crabtree Close ACCEPTED Wellingborough

BN/2012/3885/ Mr and Mrs Purchase Re-roof - Thermal upgrade. Crabtree Close ACCEPTED Wellingborough

PS/2012/3886/ Northampton Borough Council Conversion of offices to residential St Giles Square flats. APPROVED Northampton

PS/2012/3887/ Northampton Borough Council Conversion of offices to residential St Giles Square flats. APPROVED Northampton

FP/2012/3888/ Mr L Valeur Two storey side extension. Keats Close APPROVED Earls Barton Wellingborough - 107 -

Application No. Name & Address Description

BN/2012/3889/ Jay - Garage conversion. 44 Wentworth Avenue ACCEPTED Wellingborough Northants

DI/2012/3890/ Mrs M Patel Ramped access/new internal College Street access door also including ACCEPTED Wellingborough automated garage door with internal door widening.

BN/2012/3917/ Rebecca Hall Convert outside facing lavatory to Harbinger Road internal and installation of ACCEPTED London replacement windows and doors.

WI/2012/4024/ Mr C Willis Replacement double glazed Ashby Close windows, back door and front door. ACCEPTED Wellingborough - 108 -

Received Appeals

Appeal Site Ref. No. Date Status Received

Land adj. WP/2012/0139/O 16/08/2012 Statement of Case 200 Glebe House Sent – Awaiting Sywell Road Site Visit Mears Ashby

3 Eastfield Road WP/2012/0274/F 16/08/2012 Statement of Case Wellingborough Sent – Awaiting Site Visit

High Street and off WP/2012/0165/OM 02/10/2012 Statement of Case Alfred Street sent Irchester Wellingborough Northants

NB. Wind Farm at Bozeat WP/2008/0603/FEIA Rerun of Public Inquiry ordered by the High Court