Planning Application List
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Item 5 East Northamptonshire Council Cedar Drive THRAPSTON Northamptonshire NN14 4LZ APPLICATIONS FOR DETERMINATION DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE - 29 August 2012 INDEX OF APPLICATIONS FOR CONSIDERATION Application Location Recom. Page No. 12/00767/FUL 332 Addington Road Irthlingborough Refuse 2 Wellingborough Northamptonshire NN9 5UT 12/00844/FUL 45 Sartoris Road Rushden Grant 18 Northamptonshire NN10 9TL 12/00861/OUT 1 Kimbolton Road Chelveston Grant 29 Wellingborough Northamptonshire NN9 6AN 12/00923/FUL Area North Of Catshead Woods Brigstock Grant 37 Road Sudborough Northamptonshire 12/00941/FUL 83 Main Street Yarwell Northamptonshire Grant 46 PE8 6PR 12/01028/FUL East Northamptonshire Council Cedar Drive Grant 56 Thrapston Northamptonshire NN14 4LZ 12/01095/EXT Land South West Of RAF Molesworth 61 Peterborough Development Control Committee 1 of 68 Date printed 29 August 2012 Committee Report Committee Date : 29 August 2012 Printed: 30 July 2012 Case Officer Carolyn Tait 12/00767/FUL Date received Date valid Overall Expiry Ward Parish 8 May 2012 23 May 2012 22 August 2012 Irthlingborough Waterloo Irthlingborough Applicant Birchester Medicare Ltd Agent David Jackson Location 332 Addington Road Irthlingborough Wellingborough Northamptonshire NN9 5UT Proposal Demolition of an existing public house and associated structures and the erection of a sixty five bedroom nursing home This application is brought before Development Control Committee as it is a major development proposal. 1 Summary of Recommendation 1.1 That permission be REFUSED. 2. The Proposal 2.1 The application proposes the demolition of the existing Crows Nest public house and the erection of a 65 bedroom nursing home. 2.2 The proposed nursing home would have three storeys as well as attic space and would measure approximately 39.5 metres in depth by 39.5 metres in width and 12 metres in height. It would be constructed from red facing brick, vertical cedar cladding, upvc windows, render and grey concrete interlocking tiles. 2.3 29 parking spaces are proposed, four of which will be allocated for disabled users. A loading and unloading area is also proposed to the south of the site. Landscaping has been proposed to soften the appearance of the car parking area to the front of the site. 2.4 The ground floor would accommodate 19 bedrooms (five of which would be double rooms), five of these rooms would have en-suite facilities and all others, a wc and hand basin. It would also accommodate a laundry room, a kitchen, a prep area, a nurses room, a nurses station, a plant room, an office, a reception area, an entrance lobby, a meeting room, two disabled bathrooms, a number of stores, a wet room, a quiet room/dining room and a lounge. The Care Quality Commission’s ‘Essential Standards of quality and safety’ advises that double rooms are acceptable. 2.5 The proposed first floor would accommodate 23 bedrooms (six of which would be double rooms), eight of these rooms would have en-suite facilities and all others would have a wc and hand basin; a dining room, two wet rooms, a nurses room, a nursing station, an office, two lounge areas, two disabled bathrooms, a number of stores and a quiet room. The second floor plan is the same as the first floor. Development Control Committee 2 of 68 Date printed 29 August 2012 2.6 The attic plan shows that this floor will be used for storage and the air handling plant room. 2.7 An area of amenity space has been provided to the rear of the site and a sensory garden has been proposed to the south of the proposed building. 2.8 The application is supported by: • A phase I ecological survey • Design and Access Statement • Lighting assessment • Noise assessment • Supporting planning statement • Sustainability appraisal and energy statement • Transport assessment • Travel plan • An accountants report • An archaeological trial trench evaluation • A phase I contamination risk assessment 3 The Site and Surroundings 3.1 The application site is located on the edge of Crow Hill housing estate. Crow Hill forms part of Irthlingborough, but is separated from the main town by the A6. 3.2 The Crow Hill estate is situated to the south of the site and the remainder is surrounded by open countryside. The Frontier Centre (an outdoor activity resource) is located to the north of the site and there is a Site of Special Scientific Interest within 2km. 3.3 The site is accessed off of the Addington Road just within the 30mph area of this road. Beyond the pub to the north, this road is derestricted. 3.4 The site currently accommodates the Crows Nest Public House, which up until very recently has been open to the public. There are a number of out buildings associated with the pub and a large rear garden to the east. The pub also benefits from car parking to the west. 4 Policy Considerations 4.1 National Planning Policy Framework 4.2 East Midlands Regional Plan Policy 2 – Promoting Better Design Policy 3 – Distribution of New Development Policy 13b – Housing Provision (Northamptonshire) Policy 18 – Regional Priorities for the Economy Policy 29 – Priorities for Enhancing the Region’s Biodiversity Policy 38 – Regional Priorities for Waste Management Policy 39 – Regional Priorities for Energy Reduction and Efficiency Policy 48 – Regional Car Parking Standards On 10th November 2010 the High Court ruled that the Secretary of State's decision to revoke Regional Spatial Strategies was unlawful as it had been taken without primary legislation. A statement was then issued by the Government reiterating their intention to remove RSSs and that this should be treated as a material consideration. Despite a further legal challenge, it has now been confirmed that the Government's intention to abolish RSSs is a material consideration which should be taken into account when determining a planning application. Whilst the Localism Bill has now received Royal Assent Regional Strategies have not yet been revoked Development Control Committee 3 of 68 Date printed 29 August 2012 4.3 North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy Policy 7 – Delivering Housing Policy 8 – Delivering Economic Prosperity Policy 9 – Distribution and Location of Development Policy 10 – Distribution of Housing Policy 11 – Distribution of Jobs Policy 13 General Sustainable Development Principles Policy 14 – Energy Efficiency and Sustainable Construction 4.4 Three Towns Plan, Preferred Options Document 4.5 Other Documents Planning Out Crime SPG Local Highway Authority Standing Advice for Local Planning Authorities CAMRA – Public House Viability Test Planning SPG 5 Relevant Planning History 5.1 85/01162/FUL Single storey rear extension. PERMITTED. 5.2 98/00211/FUL Double garage. PERMITTED. 5.3 04/00083/FUL Change of use from public house to residential. REFUSED. This application was refused as it would have resulted in the loss of a community facility without any justification for it’s loss. 5.4 11/01664/FUL Demolition of an existing public house and associated structures and the erection of a sixty five bedroom nursing home. WITHDRAWN. This application was withdrawn as the officers advised that the application was likely to be refused for a number of reasons. The officers felt that all issues could potentially be addressed so a number of discussions took place following the withdrawal of this application and the resubmission of the current application. 6 Consultations and Representations 6.1 Neighbours: Comments received from No 41 Churchill Avenue, No.330 Addington Road, No.43 Churchill Avenue and No. 9 Noble Avenue and can be summarised as: • Noise from the extraction fans in the kitchen and laundry room; • Smell coming from the fans; • Parking concerns; • Smell from the bin area; • The height of the building would result in loss of light to homes and gardens • Overlooking; • Drainage problems, how will the drainage be connected? • The pub has lost so much money as it is never open; • The pub was given it’s licence to provide an amenity for local residents, without the pub residents will become isolated; • There is a right of way through the site; • The proposal will be completely out of place in this location; • Concerned that the site will end up derelict for a number of years through lack of sound investment. 6.2 Letter from the existing tenant/operator of the Crows Nest can be summarised as: • Supports the application for a nursing home. • It is impossible to make a living wage from operating the Crows Nest public house. • Over the past 2 years many different types of promotion have been tried but unfortunately little support was gained by the nearby housing estate. Development Control Committee 4 of 68 Date printed 29 August 2012 • At present only 1 part timer is employed due to a lack of business. A new nursing home would be able to employ many staff and contribute much more to the local community. This type of facility will be much needed in the future. It should be noted that the current land lady is the daughter of the applicant. 6.3 Irthlingborough Town Council: No comments received. 6.4 North Northamptonshire Joint Planning Unit: Comments can be summarised as follows: • The relatively minor alterations to the front elevation do make quite an improvement, although the building still appears squat by virtue of the roof pitch and width. • It is good to see that the changes have been enacted to match the rear, with the introduction of more vertical French windows and the introduction of timber cladding has added a bit of variety to the materials and rear elevation. • As per paragraphs 63 and 64 great weight should be given to outstanding or innovative design which helps raise standards of design more generally in the area and permission should be refused for development of poor design which fails to take the opportunities available for improving the character and quality of an area and the way it functions.