Planning Committee Wednesday 8 August 2012 at 7.00 Pm

Planning Committee Wednesday 8 August 2012 at 7.00 pm

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

1. Apologies for absence. Ι 2. Declarations of Interest. Ι 3. Confirmation of the minutes of the meeting held on 04/07/2012. Ι 4. Applications for planning permission, listed building consent, building regulation approval and appeals information. 5. Any other items that the Chairman decides are urgent.

Ι Enclosed

Site Viewing Group for Tuesday 7 August 2012 will be Councillors Ward, Griffiths, Waters, Morrall and Scarborough.

John T Campbell Chief Executive

Date issued: 31 July 2012.

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

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

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

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

Borough Council of Wellingborough Planning Committee Wednesday 8th August 2012 at 7.00 pm Council Chamber, Swanspool House

INDEX

Page No. SITE VIEWING GROUP

WP/2012/0250/FM 42 Prince of Wales, Croyland Road, Wellingborough. 1 WP/2012/0286/F - 23 Wilson Way, Earls Barton. 7

DISTRICT

WP/2012/0116/RMM - Land associated with and Railway Station, Midland Road, Wellingborough. 15 WP/2012/0181/F - 59 Sunnyside, Earls Barton. 20 WP/2012/0223/F - The Ten O’clock, 42 Main Street, Little Harrowden. 27 WP/2012/0255/F - 188 Station Road, Irchester 38 WP/2012/0269/F - 10 Fellows Close, Wollaston. 51 WP/2012/0300/TX - Land between 12 and 18 Bull Close, Bozeat. 58

OTHER BOROUGH

WP/2012/0298/OB - Aspenfield, Main Street, Orton, Northamptonshire. NN14 1LJ 68

FOR INFORMATION

WP/2011/0442/C - Land to the West of the Village of Isham, A509, Isham. 72 WP/2012/0270/C - Land west of Earls Barton Quarry, Grendon Road, Earls Barton. 79

- 1 -

BOROUGH COUNCIL OF WELLINGBOROUGH

SITE VIEWING (Date of visit Tuesday 7th August 2012 at 10.15 a.m.)

Planning Committee 08/08/2012

Report of the Head of Planning and Local Development

APPLICATION REF: WP/2012/0250/FM

PROPOSAL: Demolition of the existing public house and erection of a part 2 storey and part 3 storey building for a supported residential care scheme for disabled adults together with parking provision and vehicular access from Monks Way - changes to design and reduction in height of building.

LOCATION: 42 Prince of Wales, Croyland Road, Wellingborough.

APPLICANT: Seagrave Developments Limited

Councillor Robert Hawkes has requested Committee consideration and Members Site Visit.

SITE DESCRIPTION AND PROPOSAL The site is located at the junction of Croyland Road and Monks Way, in close proximity to the centre of Wellingborough. The site was occupied on the Croyland Road frontage by a Public House. To the rear of the building is a large tarmac surfaced car park, with access via Monks Way. The Public House is currently boarded up and was sold by the brewery as it was no longer a viable business. At the time of drafting this report, there are plans to demolish the building. The site abuts Croyland Park to the west and on its immediate west is an existing bakery with retail/shop and sales outlet.

The proposal is to demolish the existing public house and construct a part 2 and part 3 storey building to accommodate a supported housing scheme for disabled adults wishing to live an independent lifestyle. The proposed development consists of 25 self contained flats (23 x 1 beds and 2 x 2 beds) with ancillary concierge/warden’s office on the ground floor and a social/meeting room on the first floor. The 3-storey element of the proposed building is towards the Croyland Road frontage and dropping down to 2 storeys along the Monks Way frontage. There is an under-croft access on Monks Way frontage, leading to a courtyard area that includes disable parking bays, ambulance parking, cycle parking and a parking and charging area for mobility scooters. It is understood that the facility will be taken over by Wellingborough Homes once completed.

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY: In May 2008, the Committee considered and resolved to grant consent for ‘Demolition of existing public house and construction of 21 new flats over 2/3 storeys. Car WP/2012/0250/FM44

ABBOTS WAY

32 18

G 28

ABBOTS WAY

Drain 5

1 8

CLOSE MONKS WAY

ARS FRI

4 11

9 2

The Prince 46 of Wales 44 (PH) CR

36 53.3m A

2 24

55.5m 41

37b

37a

33 35 29 59.1m

CROYLAND ROAD 15

13 1 2

26 Chimney 57.6m 27

12 13

Wrenn

School 41

24 Planning & Local Development © Crown Copyright and database right 2012. Scale: Ordnance Survey 100018694. Legend This map is accurate 1:1,250 Cities Revealed to the scale specified Aerial Photography copyright: when reproduced at A4 WP/2012/0250/FM - Prince of Wales, 42 Croyland Road, Wellingborough ± GetMapping PLC 1999 - 2 -

parking provision 30 spaces, altered access and landscaping’ (Council Ref: WP/2008/0082). The previous owners claimed that the development was not built due to lack of demand and over-supply of flats in Wellingborough Town. They subsequently submitted another proposal for the following proposal which was also consented:

Proposed alterations to, extension and conversion of the existing public house to provide six (6) self contained flats and erection of eight (8) dwelling houses at the rear and side of the site together with car parking and landscaping (Council Ref: WP/2010/0193).

NATIONAL AND LOCAL PLANNING POLICY: National Planning Policy Framework North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy Policy 1 – Strengthening The Network of Settlements Policy 9 – Distribution and Location of Development Policy 13 – General Sustainable Development Principles Policy 14 – Energy Efficiency and Sustainable Construction Wellingborough Local Plan Policy H8 – Affordable Housing

SUMMARY OF REPLIES TO CONSULTATIONS/REPRESENTATIONS RECEIVED: 1. NCC Highways – no objection subject to the imposition of the following conditions:

The vehicular crossing is to be constructed, the existing crossing closed and all highway surfaces where affected by the proposals reinstated in accordance with the specification of Northamptonshire County Council and subject to an appropriate licence/agreement under the Highways Act 1980; To assist the movement of prams and wheelchairs the vehicular crossing should be constructed using taper and half section kerbs in lieu of the radius form indicated on the plan; Vehicle to vehicle visibility of 2m x 43m and pedestrian to vehicle visibility of 2.4m x 2.4m (2m x 2m where turning facilities are available within the site) above a height of 0.6m must be provided and maintained on both sides of the point of access; and To prevent loose material being carried onto the highway at least the first 5m of the driveway in rear of the highway boundary must be paved with hard bound materials.

2. BCW Design Officer – scheme is now acceptable. Changes have been made to address previous concerns.

3. The occupier of no. 29 Croyland Road - I have inspected the revised proposal for the Price of Wales site and I see that the roof line has been lowered significantly. I acknowledge that this will make the building less dominant than before, and to that extent it represents an improvement. However, there are still serious outstanding issues:

It is still a predominantly three storey building in an otherwise two storey neighbourhood, and even with the marginal reduction in height of the second floor windows, it will still seriously compromise the privacy of surrounding properties in both Croyland Road and Monks Way. - 3 -

Both Croyland Rd. and Monks way have an established building line; this proposal maintains that building line in Croyland Road but not in Monks Way. As designed, the east elevation comes to within a foot or so of the pavement, leaving the lounge-diner windows of flats 3, 5, 8 & 9 with virtually no privacy from passers-by.

If the building line established by Nos. 1 & 3 Monks Way (and by the old Prince of Wales pub – more or less) were adhered to, it would leave space for a screen of trees. This would eliminate the privacy problem, both for the residents of the flats and of the surrounding properties; it would also make the whole development more visually acceptable. This has been done – fairly successfully – with an equally out of place block of flats on the corner of Doddington Rd. and Butterfields.

Basically, all these problems stem from the developers’ desire to squeeze in more accommodation than the plot will bear.

ASSESSMENT: Principle of Residential Development The merits of the proposed development have been established following the Committee approval in 2008 for a similar development comprising 21 new flats over 2/3 storeys, car parking provision altered access and landscaping’ (Council Ref: WP/2008/0082). Nonetheless, the proposed development is consistent with the provisions in the new NPPF and the main thrust of the Core Strategy which seeks to direct new development to urban areas and utilise brownfield sites for further housing provisions. In the circumstances, the proposed development on this site is acceptable in principle.

Design, Layout, Character and Appearance There is no prevalent common architectural theme in the area, although most buildings are 2-storeys in height. The secondary building within the development that has a frontage to Monks Road is acceptable in this regard. The building is 2-storeys in height and picks on the characteristic features of the neighbouring buildings in terms of the fenestration and hipped roof profile.

In the case of the 3-storey building on Croyland Road frontage, the design is also satisfactory. The ridge height of this building would be than the existing public house and the neighbouring building, perhaps due to the low ceiling height in modern buildings. As this building is at the intersection of 2 roads, it is expected that it should have a higher profile in order to create a street presence and reference point. Nevertheless its design is acceptable and it layout follows the building line that has already been established by other neighbouring buildings on Croyland Road frontage.

Traffic and Parking The parking provision within the development is below the requisite standards. However, regard should be paid to the intended occupiers who are mostly unlikely to be car owners. The sub-standard parking provision is compensated for with bicycle and mobility scooter storage areas.

- 4 -

Amenity Consideration The site is bounded to the north by the flank wall of a bakery. There are no openings on this flank wall. The wall is adjacent to the proposed car park and at an appreciable distance from the proposed buildings. In the circumstances, it is expected that the current bakery operations would neither impact on the amenities of the future occupiers of the development nor the residential development be prejudicial to its operations.

The 2-storey building on Monks Road frontage is separated from the common boundary with the neighbouring dwelling on Monks Road by 3 metres which doubles that of the 2008 consented scheme. Furthermore, there are no habitable upper floor windows or other openings on this elevation and therefore there would be no overlooking and loss of privacy. The only window at first floor level serves the internal corridor within this part of the development. Furthermore, additional tree planting is proposed on this boundary, which will offer additional safeguards and protect the privacy of the adjoining residential garden. In the interest of the amenities of the neighbouring occupiers, it is recommended that a condition be imposed to prevent further window or other openings on the side elevation of the proposed 2-storey block facing Monks Road.

The proposal makes no provision for communal amenity space. However, this is to be expected in residential developments within an urban location, due in part to site constraints and the need to maximise the use of land.

Affordable Housing Policy H9 of the Local Plan and Core Strategy Policy 15 requires a proportion of major residential development to be set aside and managed for social housing. Such obligation is unnecessary in this instance given that the proposed development would be rented accommodation in its entirety and aimed at a special needs group – thus helping in meeting the Borough’s housing needs.

Summary and Conclusion: Having considered the above, there are no material planning considerations to justify the refusal of this application, which complies with the relevant development plan policies and national guidance. The application is therefore recommended for approval.

The Committee’s attention is drawn to the provisions in DCLG Circular 03/2009 which provides guidance on situations where costs may be awarded for unreasonable behaviour by a planning authority. Paragraph B29 sets out examples of circumstances which may lead to an award of costs against a planning authority. This includes a situation where the authority fails to grant permission for a scheme the subject of an extant or recently expired permission where there has been no material change in circumstances. The proposed development is similar to the previous scheme that was approved by the Committee. In amenity impact terms, the current scheme is an improvement. Furthermore, there has been no change to the development plan and the proposal is not inconsistent with the main provisions in the new National Planning Policy Framework. Therefore, there can be no substantive reasons for declining the application and if consent is not granted, an appeal is likely to be successful with cost awarded against the Council.

- 5 -

RECOMMENDATION: Grant permission subject to the following conditions:

1. The development shall be begun not later than the expiration of three years beginning with the date of this permission. 2. Notwithstanding any materials specified on the approved plans, 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 commences and the development shall be built in accordance with the approved samples. 3. Details of those parts of the site not covered by buildings including any parking, roads, footpath, hard and soft landscaping (including tree specimens), surface and boundary treatments shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority before the commencement of the development. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details. 4. No windows or other openings other than those already approved as part of this development shall be formed on the northern flank elevation of the proposed building facing the existing dwelling on Monks Road above the ground floor without the prior written consent of the local planning authority. 5. The car parking spaces, bicycle spaces, mobility scooter charging area and refuse storage accommodation shown on the approved drawings shall be provided before the occupation of the dwellings and shall thereafter be kept free from obstruction and shall be retained for their intended specified purposes incidental to the enjoyment of the proposed development. 6. The vehicular crossing shall be constructed, the existing crossing closed and all highway surfaces where affected by the proposals reinstated in accordance with the specification of Northamptonshire County Council and subject to an appropriate licence/agreement under the Highways Act 1980. 7. To assist the movement of prams and wheelchairs the vehicular crossing shall be constructed using taper and half section kerbs in lieu of the radius form indicated on the plan. 8. Vehicle to vehicle visibility of 2m x 43m and pedestrian to vehicle visibility of 2.4m x 2.4m (2m x 2m where turning facilities are available within the site) above a height of 0.6m shall be provided and maintained on both sides of the point of access. 9. To prevent loose material being carried onto the highway at least the first 5m of the driveway in rear of the highway boundary must be paved with hard bound materials. 10. Before the development commences, an Environmental Risk Assessment (ERA) to identify potential for contamination of the site shall be submitted to the local planning authority prior to the commencement of the development. Should the ERA identify any contamination, it shall contain measures for its remediation that shall be approved in writing by the local planning authority. The site shall be remediated to the satisfaction of the local planning authority prior to the occupation of the development.

- 6 -

Reasons: 1. Required to be imposed pursuant to S51 of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004. 2. To secure a satisfactory appearance for the development in the interest of the visual amenity of the area. 3. To ensure that the site is satisfactorily landscaped in the interest of the visual amenity of the area. 4. To protect the amenities of the neighbouring residential occupiers. 5. To ensure adequate facilities and parking provision within the development and in order to prevent additional parking in the surrounding streets, which could be detrimental to amenity and prejudicial to safety. 6. In the interest of highway safety. 7. In the interest of highway safety. 8. In the interest of highway safety. 9. In the interest of highway safety. 10. In the interest of health and safety of the occupiers of the 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 1 - Strengthening The Network of Settlements Policy 9 - Distribution and Location of Development Policy 13 - General Sustainable Development Principles Policy 14 - Energy Efficiency and Sustainable Construction Wellingborough Local Plan Policy H8 - Affordable Housing 2. The applicant is advised that this decision relates to the following drawing numbers received on the dates shown: Drawing Numbers: Date Received: 12-144-01 and 02 23 May 2012 03A and 250 22nd June 2012 - 7 -

BOROUGH COUNCIL OF WELLINGBOROUGH

SITE VIEWING (Date of visit Tuesday 7th August 2012 at 11.00 a.m.)

Planning Committee 08/08/2012

Report of the Head of Planning and Local Development

APPLICATION REF: WP/2012/0286/F

PROPOSAL: First floor extension to side and rear of property - re- submission.

LOCATION: 23 Wilson Way, Earls Barton, Northampton. NN6 0NZ

APPLICANT: Mr A Smith.

This application is deferred to Planning Committee for determination due to the high number of third party objections and requests for a Members Site Viewing by a ward Councillor and the Parish Council.

DESCRIPTION OF SITE AND PROPOSAL: As described above.

The development site is situated in the southern region of the Limited Development village policy line envelope of Earls Barton and is on the southern side of the Wilson Way/Saxon Rise road confluence. The development site is a semi-detached two storey property circa 1960s period of construction. It forms part of an established residential development predominantly of two storey semi-detached dwellings where some have front gabled elevations and some have sloping roofs and side gables. Evidence from the Planning History database indicates that at least six other properties along Saxon Rise and Wilson Way have had first floor extensions to their sides, such that they now have two storey side extensions. Noticeably in the street scene is no. 13 Saxon Rise, which was recently granted consent (WP/2012/0288/F) for a two storey side extension and attracted NO objections from local residents along Saxon Rise/Wilson Way whom may have objected to this planning application.

The property is situated on land which is elevated above the highway to the east and south and occupies a prominent site at the Wilson Way/Saxon Rise road junction. The front elevation of the property is highly visible as one approaches it from a southerly direction as one traverses up along Wilson Way from Dowthorpe Hill. Ground levels slope sharply away from the development on its eastern side, and slope gently upwards from the development as one travels northwards. The site is surrounded by residential properties on all sides except to the front where, as described above, open views transcend down the street. The property is within a residential estate that is opined to have no great architectural merit, evidenced by no conservation area status afforded to it, and where various home improvements have taken place through a formal planning

36 34

4 WP/2012/0286/F Library

5 Wks 4 1 to 5 8

8 Harcourt 12

HarcourtMews 5 14 34c

Square 7

17 24

9a 35 28 31 32a 72.5m

19 34b 15

32 BROAD STREET 18

11 34d 33

29 38

20 21 27

25 38a

Surgery 22 40

80.2m 16

31 34e 34a

Church 54

Museum 46

14 62

21 24 80 45

12 BLACKWELL CLOSE

7 4 2

Orchard

53 51

Tennis Court 39

L Twrs 45 57 41 29 37 31

7 75.6m 31

30 30

RISE El Sub Sta

27 50 48a

69 SAXON 28

8 50a

WILSON WAY 21 1

70.4m 21

52 5

BARKER ROAD

62 10

13 14

STATION

70 83 13 113

ROAD

3 5

2 86

1 90

95 16

El Sub Sta 8 94 65.5m CLOSE a

24 94

a 2

96 98

98 LB SHOEMAKERS 1 100

109

19 2 106

Planning & Local 110 Development © Crown Copyright and database right 2012. Scale: Ordnance Survey 100018694. Legend This map is accurate 1:1,524 Cities Revealed to the scale specified Aerial Photography copyright: when reproduced at A4 ± GetMapping PLC 1999 WP/2012/0286/F - 23 Wilson Way, Earls Barton - 8 -

application or permitted development process. Consequently, the general character and appearance of the area is of an eclectic mix of residential properties.

Planning permission is being sought for a first floor extension to the side and rear above the existing single storey side and rear extensions to create a new bedroom and ensuite and extensions to the two existing bedrooms to the rear.

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY: WR/1961/0062 Housing site – approved with conditions WR/1962/0180 27 pairs of houses and 54 garages - approved BW/1980/0628 Double garage – approved with conditions BW/1981/0521 Single-storey side extension – approved with conditions BW/1985/0438 Double garage – approved with conditions WP/2012/0114 First floor extension to side and rear of property - withdrawn

NATIONAL GUIDANCE, DEVELOPMENT PLAN POLICY AND SUPPLEMENTARY PLANNING DOCUMENTS/GUIDANCE National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) Regional Spatial Strategy 8 North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy (NNCSS): Policy 13 (General Sustainable Development Principles) Policy 14 (Energy efficiency and sustainable construction) Borough Council of Wellingborough Local Plan: Policy G4 (Development within the limited development and restricted infill villages) Supplementary Planning Guidance: II: Residential Extensions IV: Planning Out Crime Supplementary Planning Documents: Sustainable Design Biodiversity Northamptonshire Minerals and Waste Development Framework – Development and Implementation Principles

SUMMARY OF REPLIES TO CONSULTATIONS/REPRESENTATIONS RECEIVED: 1. Earls Barton Parish Council – do not object, but request a Site Viewing by the Planning Committee.

2. Neighbours – ten responses were received at the time this report was written and the reasons cited by the authors are summarised below:-

5 (FIVE) letters of OBJECTION –

• Over-development • Harmful to the street scene • Monstrous eyesore • Blight on our lovely village • Overbearing • Visually intrusive • Unbalances the property (semi-detached pair) - 9 -

• Living conditions (of neighbouring semi) will be harmed – loss of light, views, loss of privacy

6 (SIX) letters of SUPPORT

• Street scene NOT harmed • Enhances the area • No increase of footprint • Other extensions in area have been granted – precedent has been set • NOT detrimental to our view • Preventing extensions would be detrimental to the area • NO overlooking • Extension is sympathetic to the street scene

3. Councillor Peter Wright – “This is a large development in a residential area with a specific street scene. I would like to ensure that a site viewing takes place for this application so that this aspect of the proposed develop is considered by the planning committee. I would like to be at the site viewing so please inform me when this will take place.”

4. Borough Council of Wellingborough Design Officer – “The amended scheme shows an architecturally rational and subsidiary extension to the existing house. I now, therefore, I have no objections to it.”

ASSESSMENT: The material planning considerations are considered to be:

• Compliance with policy • Impact on Neighbour’s Amenities • Impact on the character and appearance of the area • Crime and disorder • Biodiversity • Other Considerations

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

The development proposal is within the village policy line and it is opined not to be contrary to this aspect of policy, but whether it is considered to be harmful to its surrounding environs or adversely affecting the character and appearance of the area is discussed more in depth in the succeeding parts of this report, together with other aspects of policy and relevant material considerations - 10 -

Impact on the character and appearance of the area The North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy Policy 13 (h) says that new development should be of a high standard of design, architecture and landscaping, respect and enhance the character of its surroundings. Local Plan Policy G4 also requires new development to respect the surrounding style. This principle is also reflected in NPPF where in considering the design of the built environment development should contribute positively to making places better for people, and this concept is also reflected in the guidance contained in that of the SPD: Sustainable Design. With reference to this Council’s SPG II on ‘Residential Extensions’ corner properties such as this site (as it is considered to fall into the designation of a corner plot) in particular need very careful treatment because of their prominence.

As described above, this plot is unquestionably a ‘prominent’ site with views onto it from its front, side and rear highly visible. Notably, an earlier scheme (WP/2012/0114/F) was withdrawn by the applicant on the advice given by the case officer that it may be refused because of its detrimental impact upon the living conditions of neighbouring occupiers and the character and appearance of the area. Officer advice, based upon guidance received from the pertinent Design Officers at the Joint Planning Unit and Wellingborough Council, suggested that the rear element of scheme be revised to accord to the advice given in the SPG II and for the side element of the scheme to be amended to incorporate additional fenestration.

This latest proposal has introduced an additional first floor window to the side together with a velux roof light in the existing side facing roof slope, and this Council’s Design Officer has declared that the scheme no longer harms the street scene and is architecturally rational and subsidiary to the existing house.

It is accepted that the scheme will be a prominent addition to the street scene by way of its massing, location and layout. However, the question remains as to whether it would be so detrimental to the street scene, that this is a solid enough planning reason to justify refusing the scheme.

At this conjecture it is worth considering the wording contained in paragraphs 56, 63 and 64 of the NPPF, and that contained in Policy 13 (h) of the NNCSS and Policy G4 of the Local Plan. The NPPF places emphasis on development contributing positively to making places better for people, that it should raise the standard of design more generally in the area and take opportunities for improving the character and quality of an area. Policy 13 (h) of the NNCSS is reflective of this material consideration as development is required to ‘respect’ and ‘enhance’ the character of its surroundings. On the other hand, Policy G4 of the Local Plan only goes as far is saying that development should not individually or cumulatively not have an adverse impact on the character and setting of the village and its environs. Policy G4, therefore, implies the inference that so long as the character of an area is not adversely affected, the development does not necessarily have to enhance or improve it. The inference of NPPF and Policy 13 would imply that all development has to enhance an area’s character. Thus it is questionable whether any extension to a property can enhance an area’s character or appearance. It is propositioned that in most cases residential extensions would not ordinarily enhance an area as the originally planned development would be compromised by the extensions. However, the impact of an extension - 11 -

(development) on an area’s character carries with it a degree of subjectivity on the part of the decision maker. Professional opinion of experts within the field of urban design set against those opinions of the general public would need to be weighed-up by the decision maker as to when a development is of an appearance that does not harm the area and can ‘enhance’ an area.

In light of the 2011 Localism Act, there is a growing ground swell of opinion that planning decisions should be made with the interests of the ‘local community’ at its centre. The definition of what constitutes a ‘local community’ is not readily found and the author would suggest that the village as a whole would be a useful starting reference point to define the ‘local community’ in which this development sits as being the village. Thus it would be wrong to include or exclude certain points of view form members of this ‘local community’ because of how close they live to the development. Thus all ‘local’ views expressed are afforded equal weight.

The Wilson Way area and its wider environs, including Saxon Rise, are not opined to be of any exceptional appearance as the properties are of varying forms, styles and many have been altered by way of varying extensions and alterations. Consequently, other than the estate having a general appearance of 1960s style housing development, the area is characterised by the randomness of the various property improvements undertaken by the property owners/occupiers. Examples of two side storey extensions are evident along Saxon Rise and Wilson Way where some of the extensions have been made flush with the principle roof slope and front elevation. It is opined that the proposed extension would be in keeping with the general property improvements in the area and would, therefore, not look out of place when observed in context with the other properties. Of note is the fact that the ‘local community’ chose not to oppose or support the recently approved side extension to no. 13 Saxon Rise (WP/2012/0288/F), which is only a small stone’s throw away from this proposed development. Thus, it would appear that local opinion is sometimes indifferent to other residential schemes within the immediate locality. Whether this is reflective of the nature of the development proposal or that of the ‘local’ personalities involved is not a matter for this report to adjudge.

Professional opinion finds this proposal to have no detrimental impact on the character and appearance of the area, whereas the opinion of the local people is somewhat divided in its opinion such that there roughly equal proportions of local residents whom either support or oppose the scheme. The Parish Council have NOT objected to the scheme.

Based upon the foregoing assessment, then it is considered that the proposal will have a significant impact upon the prevailing street scene, but local opinion is divided on whether this impact is to its detriment or to its enhancement. Professional opinion remains neutral in as far as concluding that it is rational and subsidiary. Taking into account the prevailing planning policy and the considerations of the NPPF, then at best the development is subjectively concluded not to adversely affect the street scene and equally not to enhance it as any residential extension is questioned on its ability to always ‘enhance’ an area’s character.

It is therefore concluded that the proposal is marginally in accordance with Policy 13 (h) of the NNCSS and Policy G4 (2) of the Local Plan. - 12 -

Impact on Neighbour’s Amenities Policy 13 (l) of the North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy states that new development should not result in an unacceptable impact on the amenities of neighbouring properties or the wider area by reason of loss of light or overlooking. Paragraph 56 of the NPPF states that: good design should contribute positively to making places better for people.

With reference to this Council’s SPG II on Residential Extensions, the proposed scheme is not adjudged to fall foul of the SPG’s advice for two storey rear extensions as the proposed first floor extension to the rear does not protrude beyond the 45 degree line as drawn from the (existing) ground floor habitable room window (as discussed below).

As mentioned earlier in this report, this proposal is an amended scheme to an earlier withdrawn scheme as this withdrawn scheme was found to infringe the SPG II test for first/two storey rear extensions. Consequently, this latest proposal has been designed to ensure that the rear extension will not project beyond a line drawn at 45 degrees from the middle of the nearest ground floor window of the habitable room of the adjacent property (No. 19 Saxon Rise). It should be noted that the habitable room window of no. 19 Saxon Rise used in this assessment is no longer the most rear facing window as it has been removed and a brick single storey rear extension (which includes at least one velux window in its roof slope) now protrudes beyond this previous window. The rear extension of 19 Saxon Rise protrudes beyond the rear wall of the property to the same degree as the existing single storey rear extension of 23 Wilson Way. Whilst the views of the affected party are noted, the proposal is not considered to cause any significant harm to the living conditions of the affected party as it complies with the guidance contained in SPG II.

On balance, it is considered that the scheme would not be contrary to Policy 13 (l) of the NNCSS, providing the above suggested conditions are applied.

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

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

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

Other Considerations Objections from third parties cite that the proposed scheme would constitute overdevelopment of the site. Other than the tangentially worded Questions (1.3 and 1.4) in the SPD on ‘Sustainable Design’, there is no policy guidance or policy which refers - 13 - specifically to ‘over-development’ or indeed to the parameters by which the decision maker can quantitatively assess over-development. Over-development is thus a subjective material consideration, which must be assessed with regards to the development’s massing, foot-print and relationship to other buildings in the vicinity. With regards to footprint, the applicant’s agent has provided area calculations of the respective parts of the site, the existing building and the extension. As the extension is to be above an existing ground floor storey then there is no additional land taken up by the development. Indeed, the existing footprint of the buildings on site takes up approximately 121 square metres of the entire property curtilage. This equates to 28% of the site, thus leaving 62% of the site un-built upon. On this basis, it is not considered that the proposal would lead to over-development of the total site. With regards to the proposal’s massing, then part of this assessment must take into account the impact upon the amenities of neighbouring properties. This aspect has been addressed earlier in this report and was not found to be detrimental. The last arm of the ‘overdevelopment’ issue focuses upon the development’s relationship with other buildings in the area. As reported elsewhere, the proposed extension is considered to be rational and subsidiary to the main building and is further considered to be rational and subsidiary to the surrounding buildings as when taken as a whole, the existing and extended building would not present an overly large structure relative to its neighbouring buildings. Accordingly, the proposed extension is not considered to be over-development of the site.

Conclusion It is tentatively considered that this application be approved, subject to conditions, as it is found to be marginally in accordance with the Development Plan policies. Furthermore, the weight apportioned to the material considerations in favour of the scheme are thought to just outweigh the negative material considerations of the scheme.

RECOMMENDATION: Approve with conditions.

1. The development shall be begun not later than the expiration of three years beginning with the date of this permission. 2. Representative samples of all external facing and roofing materials shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority before the development is commenced. The development shall be undertaken in accordance with the approved details. 3. Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995 (or as amended) no garages, sheds, other buildings, extensions, enlargements or other alterations of the dwellinghouse shall be erected or carried out without express planning permission from the local planning authority, other than those expressly authorised by this permission.

Reasons: 1. Required to be imposed pursuant to S51 of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004. - 14 -

2. In the interests of visual amenity in accordance with Policy 13 (l) of the North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy. 3. In the interests of visual amenity and to safeguard the amenities of the occupiers of adjoing properties in accordance with Policy 13 (l) of the North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy.

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: Policy 13 (General Sustainable Development Principles), Policy 14 (Energy efficiency and sustainable construction) of the North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy and Policy G4 (Development within the limited development and restricted infill villages) of the Borough of Wellingborough Local Plan. 2. Prior to the commencement of any site works, all occupiers of potentially sensitive properties surrounding the site should be notified in writing of the nature and duration of works to be undertaken, and the name and address of a responsible person, to whom enquiries/complaints should be directed. 3. The applicant is advised that this decision relates to the following drawing numbers received on the date shown: Drawing Number: Date Received: 12/003/01a 12th June 2012 - 15 -

BOROUGH COUNCIL OF WELLINGBOROUGH

Planning Committee 08/08/2012

Report of the Head of Planning and Local Development

APPLICATION REF: WP/2012/0116/RMM

PROPOSAL: Reserved matters application pursuant to condition 2 of planning permission ref: WP/2004/0600/O for Wellingborough Station development - incorporating proposed modular station building, station platform extensions, new railway bridge extension, multi storey car parks 01 and 02 together with car park 3 and road layout.

LOCATION: Land associated with and Railway Station, Midland Road, Wellingborough. NN8 1NQ

APPLICANT: Mr Paul Boatman, Bovis Homes Limited.

PROPOSAL AND DESCRIPTION OF SITE: This “Reserved Matters” planning application is for the development of part of a key site, the “Station Island Development Area” immediately to the east of Wellingborough Station, which will represent a gateway connection with, and form part of, Stanton Cross the town’s eastern urban extension. Pursuant to the implementation of the Wellingborough East Master-plan (adopted in 2006), and specifically to the requirements of Condition 2 attached to the associated outline planning permission reference WP/2004/0600/O, consent is sought for the following:

• Siting, design and external appearance of buildings; • Vehicle, cycle and foot access routes and parking; • Landscaping, including boundary treatment and details of street furniture and lighting; • Layout and design of public open space; and • Layout, design and specification of drainage infrastructure.

A prime objective is to expand the station facilities to accommodate the extra demand for public transport expected as the new Stanton Cross Township is built out. A modular station building is proposed to a standard Network Rail design on the east side for this purpose, complete with a public square, pick up/drop off facilities, access to two split level multi-storey car parks and associated hard and soft landscaping. By the same token, the forecourt to the existing station building on the west side will be provided with enhanced landscaping, a new pick up/drop off and taxi rank area and new short-stay and secure parking facilities.

WP/2012/0116/RMM 1

Und

TALBO T ROAD NO RTH El Sub Sta

EL Sub Sta

MP65.25 A )

Pipeline

227 254 63.1m

250

219 244 Track 211 MILL ROAD 242 A

209 64.3m 232

203

1 2 193a 226

195

3 4

193 216 Garage

187 Garage

Path

206 CR

13 196 43

33 38

23 22 23

28 24 10 Primrose

13 5 Place

WHITWORTH ROAD20 29

1 2 ) )

30 100 Garage

31 41 96 River Ise 23

94 LC 13 32

Peerless House 88

TALBOT ROAD Car Park

COMPTON ROAD 18 to 30 to 18

53 to 59

59.7m

8 to 16 to 8

6 2

61 to 67 65

ELSDEN ROAD 69 to 75 70

13 26

36 59

SALISBURY ROAD 14 2

62 Wellingborough

49 Railway Station 38

54 207

199

191 57.3m

85 183 236

Drain

46 230 47

222 FB

179 212

171

165 49.4m 44 KNOX ROAD

40 A 95

36 19 El Sub Sta 13 11

St Mary's Church 30 DRYDEN ROAD

Issues

MP 65 4

G _ 2

57.6m _ Car Park

17 13

14 1

Vicarage 2a 55.2m 2 G TCB

TCB 53.0m 191 197 Car Park 195 LB Drain

Car Park _ 194

MIDLAND ROAD 184

176 Sorting Office

212

166

160 158 1

G 12

3 Hotel 55

Drain

1a 37 45

21 22 29 47

1 65 51 67 2 49.4m

69 12

3 27 71

104 30 1

7 27 100 77 90

40 94 COLWELL ROAD 88 13

A 86

CHESTER RO AD 96 50.9m 23

33 17

SENWICK DRIVE

106

120 Planning & Local 108 Development © Crown Copyright and database right 2012. Scale: Ordnance Survey 100018694. Legend This map is accurate 1:2,500 Cities Revealed to the scale specified Aerial Photography copyright: WP/2012/0116/RMM - Land associated with and Railway Station, Midland Road, Wellingborough when reproduced at A4 ± GetMapping PLC 1999 - 16 -

Given the recent announcement about the proposals to electrify the rail lines it is confirmed that none of the proposals would have an adverse effect on the proposed electrification and all bridges have been designed and will be constructed to account for this future installation.

On the eastern site boundary, a new access road is provided to link the new roundabout at the end of the proposed Midland Road extension. This has 2m wide pavements on either side, a separate 3m wide cycle path on one side and a filter lane with bus turn-around area.

New split level and at grade car parks will increase the parking provision across the site to a maximum of 1000 spaces, comprising:

• Car park 1: 6-level public split level multi-storey facility with 510 spaces; • Car park 2: 3-level 217 space split level multi-storey facility for staff and permit holders; • Car park 3: 66 at-grade surface public spaces (to include 40 secure and 19 short- stay); • Car park 4: 207-space at-grade surface provision (Note – This is an existing car park on adjacent land and is not part of the present application site).

5% of the global provision is allocated for disabled persons, and there are 40 existing cycle spaces on the west side which will be retained, with a further 120 cycle spaces proposed for the east side. 12 new taxi spaces are provided across the whole scheme with 8 spaces on the east side and 5 on the west, together with 8 bus stops (2 on the east and 6 on the west side – Note - the 6 on the west side are outside the application site boundary and are included within the consent – ref. WP/2004/0600/O).

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY: WP/2004/0600/O Urban Extension. Conditional Outline Planning Permission. WP/2004/0730/F Midland Road extension and bridge. Conditional Planning Permission. WP/2010/0254/LB Installation of lifts and replacement footbridge/stairs. Conditional Listed Building Consent.

NATIONAL AND LOCAL PLANNING POLICY: National Planning Policy Framework. Station Island Development Brief (adopted 2004). Wellingborough East Master-plan (adopted 2006). North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy Policies 13 and 14. NNJPU – Sustainable Design SPG.

SUMMARY OF REPLIES TO CONSULTATIONS/REPRESENTATIONS RECEIVED: 1. British Transport Police - the Crime Reduction Officer has made a detailed response. Whilst not objecting in principle to the proposal, it is critiqued in an itemised list.

2. Environment Agency - no objection in principle.

3. Network Rail - no objections in principle. - 17 -

ASSESSMENT: Principle Clearly the principle of the development is secured by the outline planning permission.

Sustainable Design Network Rail has made a commitment to support the Department for Transport’s vision that “rail will support sustainable development in Great Britain”. In response, it has developed a sustainable design, construction, operation, maintenance and decommissioning strategy, together with an Initial Industry Plan identifying carbon, waste, biodiversity, ecology, diversity and climate change as key responsibilities. It has also undertaken to use sustainability monitoring and assessment methods in investment schemes relating to managed stations and other commercial estate property. These criteria are intended to be used in procurement for the present development proposal.

The organization aims to achieve a BREEAM “excellent” rating on the scheme. It is currently in discussion with the Building Research Establishment with regard to the undertaking of an in-house pre-assessment to establish what additional components the project needs to include to meet the BREEAM “excellent” requirements.

Layout and Appearance The submitted graphics and plans show a modern functional design and layout which is considered to be entirely appropriate for such a facility in an expanding Wellingborough, being highly visible and intensively used and enjoyed by local people and visitors.

The issue of an appropriate response to a traditional historic building, i.e. the Victorian railway station, is always problematic. Members will be aware that the Council’s Design and Conservation Officer is firmly against any “pastiche” form of development associated with listed buildings, taking the view that significant architecture ought properly to move on and reflect the particular mores of the age. That is not to say, of course, that materials and design aspects should be cheapskate and uninteresting. Accordingly, the submitted scheme can be wholeheartedly supported for its honesty, simplicity and robustness, thereby suitably complementing and reinforcing the aesthetic values of the existing station building and its adjuncts.

Whilst it is accepted that the general appearance of the new station building will match that of other new stations along the line, officers felt that some form of embellishment ought to be incorporated on the rail track frontage to reflect Wellingborough as a particular place. This might take the form of a decorative mural in terracotta or etched glass, and it is proposed to include the matter in the schedule of Conditions attached to the consent.

A series of sectional drawings has been submitted which clearly show the development’s positive response to the local level changes, particularly the fall north-to- south from the access bridge/roundabout down to the east station forecourt. The taller 6-level car park thereby relates logically to the roadway and as a building mass will be softened by the eventual introduction of the commercial development which fronts the new access road to the east. The two main car parks will also function as a noise buffer shielding the future commercial development from the rail track noise. - 18 -

A new urban square, positioned directly in front of the new station building, is proposed as the development’s main focus. As a pleasant meeting place for pedestrians, cyclists and station users, it will offer important breathing space in an otherwise “hard” environment. The proposed adjacent units (to be subject to a future planning application) along two sides of the square will help to create a sense of enclosure.

Landscaping Structural soft landscaping is proposed for both sides of the track and will complement the high-quality hard landscaping, lighting, seating provision, etc. Bold blocks of tree and shrub planting provide enclosure and separate the western forecourt from the proposed distributor road and cycleway. Trees in cast iron grilles help to emphasise pedestrian routes. To the south, neatly-maintained hedgerows in front of the secure parking areas soften the view of the ranks of parked cars. A bold block of tree and shrub planting at the entrance creates a strong landscape statement to welcome visitors. Trees generally have been specifically selected to tolerate an urban environment adjacent to railway infrastructure.

In the eastern area the new access road is defined by an avenue of trees. In the forecourt trees in grilles will define a unified public realm from access road to building frontage. Feature planting incorporating smaller-growing species within ornamental beds provide more intimate areas for people to wait away from the platform.

Amenity Impact As there are no immediately adjacent residential occupiers, there are no conventional amenity implications.

Access, Transport and Parking Issues Parking capacity is in line with Network Rail requirements. Additionally the Highway Authority was consulted at an early stage in the development of the present scheme in respect of access and transport issues and the proposal is in accordance with the normal adoptable standards. This includes detailed arrangements for bus routing and pick up/set down points.

Designing Out Crime The detailed representations from the British Transport Police are noted with respect to general site security. It is proposed to attach a Condition on the consent cross- referencing to the Crime Reduction Officer’s notes and requiring the carrying out of his requirements to the Council’s satisfaction.

Flood Risk, Foul Sewage and Utilities These have all been resolved to the satisfaction of the Environment Agency.

Conclusion The scheme is considered to be acceptable and is recommended for approval with conditions.

RECOMMENDATION: Grant Conditional Planning Permission.

- 19 -

1. 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. 2. The site shall be landscaped and planted with trees and shrubs in accordance with a comprehensive scheme which shall be submitted to and approved by the local planning authority before the development is commenced. The scheme shall be implemented concurrently with the development and shall be completed not later than the first planting season following the substantial completion of the development. Any trees and shrubs removed, dying, being severely damaged or becoming seriously diseased within five years of planting shall be replaced by trees and shrubs of similar size and species to those originally required to be planted or other species as may be agreed. 3. The detailed requirements of the British Transport Police as set out in its e-mail of 16/04/2012 shall be met to the reasonable satisfaction of the local planning authority. 4. Prior to the commencement of development, a scheme for the permanent decoration of the rail track frontage of the new station building shall be submitted for the consideration and written approval of the local planning authority. 5. A scheme for finger post signage shall be submitted for the consideration and written agreement of the local planning authority.

Reasons: 1. In the interests of amenity. 2. In the interests of visual amenity. 3. In the interests of security. 4. In the interests of amenity. 5. In the interests of amenity.

INFORMATIVE: The applicant is advised that this decision relates to the following drawing numbers received on the dates shown: Plans reference: Date received: 16699/SK01; 02; 03; 04; 05C; 06C; 07C; 08C; 09C; 10A and 12 WHK/1797/10A; 11C 1-3 of 3; 12C 1-3 of 3 ACD – Plaza sketch A 5th July 2012 16699/1001 - 1008 incl. Wellingborough Station Design and Access Statement 28th Feb 2012

- 20 -

BOROUGH COUNCIL OF WELLINGBOROUGH

Planning Committee 08/08/2012

Report of the Head of Planning and Local Development

APPLICATION REF: WP/2012/0181/F

PROPOSAL: Detached garage with store over to rear of dwelling - Amended window details.

LOCATION: 59 Sunnyside, Earls Barton, Northampton. NN6 0EX

APPLICANT: Mrs M Pettit.

A decision on this application was deferred at the meeting of the Planning Committee on 4 July 2012 to allow for the clarification of certain matters. The applicant’s agent has supplied the following information.

“1. No balcony has ever been discussed/applied for as part of this application. 2. No plan has ever been drawn/issued with a balcony indicated. It is an non- balcony application. 3. The plan discussed at the site viewing was he application plan. 4. A fence has been erected to prevent the young children at the property from escaping from the garden. 5. The application retains ownership of the garage by the owners of current property.”

The original report is attached and the recommendation is as before.

WP/2012/0181/F A

47 43

1 1a 8 10

85.0m PARK LANE 3

10 12 Health

Centre 5

16 7

18 9

AGGATE WAY 22

80.2m 11

20 59

El Sub Sta 26

43 7

Posts SUNNY SIDE

A 27

15 19

Planning & Local Development © Crown Copyright and database right 2012. Scale: Ordnance Survey 100018694. Legend This map is accurate 1:1,250 Cities Revealed to the scale specified Aerial Photography copyright: when reproduced at A4 ± GetMapping PLC 1999 WP/2012/0181/F - 59 Sunnyside, Earls Barton - 21 -

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

BOROUGH COUNCIL OF WELLINGBOROUGH

SITE VIEWING (Date of visit Tuesday 3rd July 2012 at 11.50 a.m.)

Planning Committee 04/07/2012

Report of the Head Planning and Development

APPLICATION REF: WP/2012/0181/F

PROPOSAL: Detached garage with store over to rear of dwelling - Amended window details.

LOCATION: 59 Sunnyside, Earls Barton, Northampton.

APPLICANT: Mrs M Pettit.

This application is referred to the Planning Committee for determination due to the level of third party objection.

PROPOSAL AND DESCRIPTION OF SITE: As described. The submitted plans illustrate a double garage that is set back a minimum of 5.5m from the highway with a hard paved driveway.

The application site is at the bottom of the rear garden of no. 59 Sunnyside and was in the process of being cleared at the time of Officer Inspection. Adjacent, is a range of agricultural buildings.

The ground level of the site generally falls down from the north to the south.

In the highway at the proposed point of access is an on-street parking area which is surfaced with loose planings recovered from local highway works.

An amended plan was receive don 15 May 2012 which corrected the fenestration details.

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY: WP/2006/0022 Proposed two storey extension to side of existing dwelling together with detached garage with store over to rear of dwelling – conditionally approved WP/2010/0166 Proposed two storey extension – conditionally approved.

- 22 -

NATIONAL GUIDANCE, DEVELOPMENT PLAN POLICY AND SUPPLEMENTARY PLANNING DOCUMENTS/GUIDANCE: National Planning Policy Framework North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy 13 (General sustainable development principles) and 14 (Energy efficiency and sustainable construction) Borough of Wellingborough Local Plan: G4 (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. Earls Barton Parish Council –

“I can confirm that Earls Barton Parish Council do not object to the application for planning permission relating to the construction of a garage at 59 Sunnyside. In the view of the Parish Council, although the entrance to the garage will mean the loss of one parking space on the parking bay adjacent to the property, the garage and the parking in front of it will provide parking for two or more cars belonging to the property. If permission is not granted, potentially, two or more cars from this property will park in the parking bay taking those spaces away from other residents of Sunnyside.”

2. Northamptonshire County Council Highway Authority –

“Whilst the proposed garage will be of considerable value to the occupier as a source of of-road parking accommodation there is some disappointment that its location reduces an area of on-street parking accommodation recently provided by the Highway Authority to address local parking difficulties. However, the proposal effectively helps to reduce the overall demand for on on-street parking in the area and no objection is raised, in principle, on highway grounds.”

The Highway Authority goes on to mention visibility specifications and the need to construct the access in hard surfacing to ensure loose material is not dragged onto the highway.

The Highway Authority re-iterated its specifications in an e-mail dated 9 May 2012 and specifically mentioned the need for the visibility splay to be achieved within the site and not in the highway.

3. Neighbours – objections have been received from the occupiers of: 9, 33, 47, 51, 53 and 57 Sunnyside, Earls Barton. The writers cite the following reasons for opposing the application:

• the parking area was provide for the local residents by the Highway Authority after consultation with residents and the Parish Council to ease congestion in Sunnyside which was being blocked by refuse collection, emergency service vehicles and agricultural vehicles etc • parking area was funded by the public purse - 23 -

• development will affect the newly built parking area and at least two car parking spaces will be lost • further application is to be made for another vehicular access at no. 59 • bays are constantly full and a further restriction has been granted for the farmer to cone off areas to turn around equipment • inability to park in Sunnyside due to increase in housing density and visiting cars force residents in Sunnyside and Aggate Way into the car parking area • satisfaction that no. 59 is being renovated • false information has been supplied with the planning application • belief that the County Highway Authority was not consulted with the application • vehicular access to no. 59 should be from the front in Sunnyside • stressed visitors due to SatNav directions and parking congestion • new garage will be separated from the dwelling and let out independently • without a condition tying the sole use of the garage to 59 Sunnyside there would be a loss of car parking for nearby residents

4. In response to the above critical comments the agent has supplied copy correspondence which, in the main, relate to correspondence between the applicant and the Northamptonshire County Council Highway Authority concerning consultation events prior to the works in the highway commencing. This submission has in turn been criticised by an objector.

ASSESSMENT: The material planning considerations are:

• Effect on neighbours amenities • Effect on the character and appearance of the area • Highway safety • Crime and disorder • Biodiversity • Effect on the Upper Nene Valley Special Protection Area (SPA)

Effect on neighbours’ amenity It is acknowledged that the proposed development could have an effect on the standard of amenity that is currently enjoyed by nearby residential occupiers. However, it is anticipated that the effects will not be so deleterious to warrant recommending the application for refusal, subject to the imposition of conditions.

The plans illustrate an obscure glazed window at first floor level that faces up the garden which, in the interests of privacy, can be conditioned to ensure that it remains as obscure glazed in perpetuity. It is also considered prudent to impose a condition to restrict the ability of any occupier to insert new windows at first floor level in the future also to maintain the neighbours’ standard of privacy.

A condition is also recommended which would require the express planning permission of the local planning authority to convert the garage into habitable accommodation. - 24 -

This would ensure that any such intended conversion could be judged on its own planning merits.

Effect on the character and appearance of the area It is considered that the proposed garage will have no material effect on the visual amenity of the street scene.

Comment has been received from local residents regarding car parking and access difficulties in the area. Concern has also been expressed regarding the loss of one or potentially two on-street car parking spaces as a result of the proposed development, although the Parish Council is content with this aspect of the proposal. This anxiety is acknowledged.

The proposal is for a double garage, although it is accepted that one of the spaces in the garage might only be suitable for a smaller vehicle. The plan also depicts that the garage would be set back from the highway by 5.5m, which is in accord with highway standards and would allow for a further two vehicles to be parked off-road whilst the garage doors are opened. The development, as proposed, would therefore have the potential to allow for four vehicles to be parked clear of the highway and could clearly lessen the demand for on-street parking in Aggate Way.

The disappointment of the County Highway Authority is noted as is its opinion that the proposed development will effectively help to reduce the overall demand for on on- street parking in the area. Crucially, the Highway Authority has not objected to the application on highway safety grounds.

With regards to highway safety, in the absence of any material evidence that can be accorded sufficient weight to refuse the application, it is considered that the proposed development is acceptable. However, it is thought prudent to remove the permitted development rights for any further vehicular accesses to be constructed to serve no. 59 Sunnyside in order to prevent multiple point of access onto Aggate Way that do not have the benefit of planning permission. Should an application come forward, the removal of permitted development would allow for matters of highway safety to be examined again on their merits.

Also suggested is a condition which would prevent the garage from being separated from no. 59 Sunnyside to create its own planning unit without the benefit of planning permission, in the interests of highway safety.

Crime and disorder There are no pertinent crime and disorder issues to take into account.

- 25 -

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

Effect on the Upper Nene Valley Special Protection Area It is anticipated that the proposed development will have no significant effect on the SPA.

Conclusion The scheme is considered to be acceptable and is recommended for approval with 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 the 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 and the development shall be carried out using the approved materials. 3. The first floor window in the northern elevation of the building shall remain as obscure glazed to the satisfaction of the local planning authority hereafter. 4. No window, other than expressly approved by this consent, shall be inserted into the building above ground floor level without the express planning permission of the local planning authority. 5. The building shall not be uses as habitable accommodation without the express planning permission of the local planning authority. 6. The use of the garage shall at all times remain incidental to the enjoyment of the dwellinghouse known as no. 59 Sunnyside and in addition, no trade or business shall be carried out therefrom. 7. 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 other vehicular access from no. 59 Sunnyside onto Aggate Way or Sunnyside shall be constructed without the express planning permission of the local planning authority. 8. Before the development is first brought into use 2.4m x 2.4m visibility splays shall be constructed.

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 privacy. 4. In the interests of privacy. 5. To prevent the building from being used as a residential annex without the benefit of planning permission. 6. To prevent the development resorting to a separate planning unit and to protect the amenity of nearby residential occupiers. - 26 -

7. To prevent multiple accesses being constructed along Aggate Way in the interests of highway safety. 8. In the interests of highway safety.

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 13 (General sustainable development principles) and 14 (Energy efficiency and sustainable construction) Borough of Wellingborough Local Plan: G4 (Villages). 2. The applicant is advised that this decision relates to the following drawing numbers received on the dates shown: Drawing Number: Date Received: 02 4 April 2012 01A 15 May 2012 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.

- 27 -

Planning Committee 08/08/2012

Report of the Head of Planning and Local Development

APPLICATION REF: WP/2012/0223/F

PROPOSAL: Conversion from Public House (A4 use class) with associated first floor living accommodation to 2 no. dwellings (C3 use class) including proposed two storey extensions to rear of property. Letter and Revised Drawings - Additional information.

LOCATION: 42 The Ten O'clock Main Street, Little Harrowden, Wellingborough. NN9 5BB

APPLICANT: Gorrell Barnes Chartered Surveyors

PROPOSAL AND DESCRIPTION OF SITE: As described above.

The application building is a functioning public house with a car park to the side and a ‘beer garden’ to the rear.

The Ten O’clock is not a listed building but the Manor House to the northeast of the application site is a grade II listed building. To the south and rear of the site is Bank Hill View.

The Little Harrowden Working Mens Club is situated some 270m further along Main Street and the The Lamb P.H. is located approximately 350m distant in Orlingbury Road.

There is an accompanying outline application – WP/2012/0244/O refers – for a residential development of three dwellings in the existing car park and beer garden. This application is not being presented to the Planning Committee for determination concurrently with this application because it is possible that the already received advice from some of the planning consultees may change depending on the outcome of this application.

The applicant has indicated on the accompanying certificate of ownership that he is a prospective purchaser of the premises.

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY: WP/1998/0082/O Site for construction of two houses and revised public house car park – allowed at Appeal. WP/1999/0350/O Site for construction of three houses and revised public house car park – dismissed at Appeal. WP/2012/0223/F SCHOOL

LANE

A 97-99 8

5 St Mary's Church

ALBION MAIN STREET 93 91.4m Manor Court

COURT

2 4

46 1

Hall 85 2 83

71 HolmfieldChapel 77 73 65

67 44 PEARTREE FARM CL 90.2m

6 63

59 Manor House

4 TCB The Ten O'Clock 53

B 574 (PH)

1 Dairy Cottage 2

BANK 38

HILL 5 2 VIEW

1 88.4m

26 3

31 1 A

5 20

21 12

32 Legend

Planning & Local WP/2012/0223/F - The Ten O'Clock, 42 Main Street, Little Harrowden Development © Crown Copyright and database right 2012. Description Scale: TOWN CLOSEOrdnance Survey 100018694. This map is accurate 1:1,250 Cities Revealed Applicant's Property to the scale specified Aerial Photography copyright: when reproduced at A4 ± GetMapping PLC 1999 Application Site - 28 -

NATIONAL GUIDANCE, DEVELOPMENT PLAN POLICY AND SUPPLEMENTARY PLANNING DOCUMENTS/GUIDANCE National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy (NNCSS): Policy 1 (Strengthening the Network of Settlements) Policy 13 (General sustainable development principles) 14 (Energy efficiency and sustainable construction) 15 (Sustainable housing provision) Borough Council 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 Implantation Principles, Sustainable Design, Biodiversity Supplementary Planning Guidance: Planning Out Crime, Parking

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

• concern regarding the entrance to the site from Main Road and the lack of parking within the village especially during the school run • the building is part of the history of the village • it serves as a meeting place and is the only family pub with a garden in the area • the village would be losing an asset • the Parish Council requests a Site Visit and would also like to know if the community have a right to buy.

With regards to the Community Right to Buy the Parish Council lodged a second comment:

“I have been speaking to Mr C Pitman regarding the Community Right to Bid and although legislation is not in force yet the Parish Council believe that the public house is a valuable asset to the community and would like to preserve this asset if at all possible. Therefore as soon as legislation is passed, hopefully in June/July the council would like the building to be included on the asset register.”

2. Northamptonshire County Council Highway Authority – originally returned the application with a pro forma sticker which counselled this Council to seek its highways advice from its published works. The Highway Authority, has, however supplied a covering letter in respect of revised access details which indicates that it is satisfied with the highway safety aspects of the scheme.

3. Northamptonshire County Council Sustainable Urban Drainage - no comment received.

4. Northamptonshire Fire and Rescue - no comment received.

5. Northamptonshire CAMRA – no comment received.

6. Borough Council of Wellingborough Planning Policy - no comment received.

- 29 -

7. Borough Council of Wellingborough Conservation and Design Officer – supports the scheme from a conservation viewpoint.

8. Borough Council of Wellingborough Environmental Protection Manager – no comment received.

9. Borough Council of Wellingborough Landscape Officer – comments that a tree protection scheme should be required by way of a condition. The garage for plot three is badly located in relation to the boundary and the cherry laurel on the other side. Does not consider the trees which are shown to be removed represent a significant loss of visual amenity but some new tree planting should be required as part of the landscape scheme.

10. Health and Safety Executive – no objection.

11. Neighbours and third parties – objections have been received from the occupiers of: 1, 3, 5 Bank Hill View, 59, 67 Main Street, 32 The Willows, Little Harrowden; 46 Brampton Close, 12 Duncan Court, Wellingborough. Objections have also been received from third parties who have not given their addresses. The objectors cite the following reasons for opposing the application:

• loss of a community facility with a garden area which attracts customers • hosts events such as open mike evenings, discos, pool tournaments, bar billiards and is a motorcycle meeting point • reference to other community facilities which have been lost and loss of the pub will further destroy the fabric of the village • pub is used by Waendel walkers • pub is part of the history of the village • other village pub caters for a different market than the 10 O’clock. The Lamb and the Working Men’s club do not have a community feel or large family friendly gardens. Residents of the village will have to drive to other villages to access a pub garden • local car parking difficulties which will be exacerbated by the development. The pub car park is currently used for parking during the school run and loss of this car park will result in more congestion. Majority of children in the school live outside the village and are brought in by car. • modern extensions on the grade II building is not in keeping and would look out of character • houses need to be affordable homes • the Public House Viability Assessment is inaccurate and subjective • building upto the boundary, scaffolding, debris and mess will affect adjoining land • loss of light • cutting back of overhanging tree will de-stabilise it • building will detrimentally affect vehicular visibility from Bank Hill View • BT telephone box will need to be removed, presumed they had to stay as part of heritage • heritage of the village is at stake - 30 -

• villages are small and should be kept as such without infill on small plots of available land • the public house is well patronised • landlord of The Ten O’clock was unaware of the application • the public house is a source of employment • the proposal is an overdevelopment of the site • reference to development history of nearby land • reference to previous planning history of the site • level thresholds to the front doors could be an accident waiting to happen with everyday road traffic • reference to acquisition of nearby play area

The occupiers of 63 Main Street, Little Harrowden are not opposed to the pub conversion subject to concerns regarding local parking difficulties and traffic issues.

12. A petition containing 74 signatures has also been received in support of the following statement:

‘PETITION AGAINST CLOSURE OF THE TEN O’CLOCK PUB’

13. The applicant has supplied supporting information during the course of the application, some of the salient points are:

• disputes the opinion that a public house is a community facility because public houses are not specifically mentioned in the Core Spatial Strategy, the saved policies of the local plan or the Town Centre Area Action Plan • acceptance that no evidence of audited accounts is available and the pub has not been marketed as a going concern. • contact has been made with a number of national and local pub operators, although only the larger ones have been identified. No interests has been expressed in trying to regenerate a small village pub • difficulties with trying to market a village ‘wet’ led pub with two other outlets nearby • tenant friendly nature of the pub owning company • the inevitable change brought about by changing lifetime, smoking ban and economic circumstances cannot be fought • the pub owner cannot continue to what effectively amounts to funding the current tenant to operate • issues regarding the lease agreement between the pub tenant and the pub owner • reference to other licensed establishments nearby in the village • premature to take into consideration any Community Right to Buy as the detail is still being debated

The applicant has mentioned the ‘track record’ of keeping other public houses trading and because the building is not owned by a brewery the accounts of the tenant are not available to the landlord. The following rents received from the public house have been made available: - 31 -

£ 01/04/2007 – 31/03/2008 24,025 01/04/2008 – 31/03/2009 19,700 01/04/2009 – 31/03/2010 20,100 01/04/2010 – 31/03/2011 14,450 01/04/2011 – 31/03/2012 6,800

The applicant has also supplied a detail response to the criticism which has been levelled at the scheme by third parties. The response covers the following issues:

• existing phone box • building adjacent boundaries • pruning of trees on neighbouring property • access • Parish Site Viewing

A final statement has been submitted by the applicant which includes an assessment from the Charnwood Pub Company Limited.

“Further to our various recent correspondence I am now pleased to enclose below a written assessment of the Ten O’clock public house from Charnwood Pub Company Ltd along with a detailed financial viability assessment of the premises. This indicates that the pub under their normal assessment criteria would be loss making.

I have forwarded the email and attachments in the format received and therefore the original author’s contact number and email address are also included. We are more than happy for you to make contact, if you feel necessary, to verify that they have produced the figures contained in their assessment.

By way of background details of Charnwood Pub Company can be viewed at http://www.charnwoodpubco.co.uk/index.php As an aside one of their premises - The Coach and Horses, Wellingborough - has been voted Northamptonshire's CAMRA Pub of The year for the second time in three years.

I hope that these are useful and support the arguments raised in our other application documents.

I should also have available a letter of confirmation from the current owner’s accountant tomorrow providing certified confirmation that the figures I have provided to you in terms of rental income received over the previous five years are genuine.

Hopefully these in combination will satisfy you that the premises is not viable as a public house. I appreciate that you have also asked us to consider the possibility of alternative community uses, for which I cannot provide you with any evidence base. I would however suggest that it is uncommon for villages the size of Little Harrowden to have multiple community buildings and the village would already seem to be well served by a number of facilities. Were this - 32 -

application permitted Little Harrowden would retain a public house, Working Men’s Club, Cricket Club and a village hall. It would seem that the village is well serviced and argued that the closure of one competing venue may improve the viability and vitality of other community buildings within the village.”

Charnwood Pub Co. “Further to our recent conversation I have spent many hours looking at the viability of The Ten O’clock Public House and as experienced operators of 12 public houses we believe that our views are well thought through.

As you are aware I have always been concerned about the ability to deliver a viable wet led offer in a small village that already has established competition and a reducing drinking audience. With this in mind my FD and I looked into the possibility of delivering a food led operation at the site but continued to struggle to make the project work. There are a number of factors that make it difficult for us to deliver a profitable operation, some of which I list below.

· Limited car parking for a food led destination site. We would look for a minimum of 40 parking spaces for our projects. We as an operator would want to keep the garden at its current size as it would extend our ability to deliver greater cover numbers when good weather is available to us, with this in mind we would not wish to reduce the garden space to increase parking · A significant level of investment would be required to deliver what customers now expect from food driven sites. The externals and internals have to be of a quality to attract trade and there would in our belief be a limited return on our capital employed. · Our company would normally look at sites that are capable of delivering a minimum net weekly take of £10k, in our view this number will never be reached at The Ten O’clock. · There would be a limited number of covers available in the current building and the required spend per head would be greater than our current food operations are able to achieve · As a multiple operator we employ management teams and in our view there is no chance of delivering the level of sales required to cover all staffing costs.

Please let me know if this is too brief and further detail is required. I personally believe that it supports other views without rewriting all of the other documentation.”

ASSESSMENT: The material planning considerations are considered to be:

• Compliance with policy • Effect on the setting of a listed building • Effect on neighbours’ residential amenities • Effect on the character of the area • Loss of a community facility • Highway safety • Crime and disorder • Biodiversity - 33 -

Compliance with policy With regards to policy and guidance relating to new homes in rural locations Policy 1 of the NNCSS 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. Little Harrowden is defined in the Borough of Wellingborough Local Plan, as a restricted infill village by saved Policy G4 and it states that development will be granted planning permission if it is within the policy line if the development would not have an adverse effect on the size, form, character and setting of the village and its environs.

Paragraph 55 of the National Planning Policy Framework goes on to say:

To promote sustainable development in rural areas, housing should be located where it will enhance or maintain the vitality of rural communities.

For example, where there are groups of smaller settlements, development in one village may support services in a village nearby. Local planning authorities should avoid new isolated homes in the countryside unless there are special circumstances such as:

• the essential need for a rural worker to live permanently at or near their place of work in the countryside; or • where such development would represent the optimal viable use of a heritage asset or would be appropriate enabling development to secure the future of heritage assets; or • where the development would re-use redundant or disused buildings and lead to an enhancement to the immediate setting; or • the exceptional quality or innovative nature of the design of the dwelling. • be sensitive to the defining characteristics of the local area.

It can be seen from the above that the general principle of the development taking place within the Little Harrowden village policy line is generally in accord with the development plan housing policies and national guidance. However, the proposal involves the loss of a community use and the relevant development plan policy and guidance relating to this issue are reproduced below.

Policy 13(f) of the Core Spatial Strategy states that development should:

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

It is accepted that the NNCSS does not specifically mention public houses as being a community facility, however, it is considered that the types of use community uses which are mentioned in the body of the strategy is not a definitive or exhaustive list of what constitutes a community use.

- 34 -

With regards to the National Planning Policy Framework it mentions in paragraph 28 that a public house is a community use and it too is copied below for ease of reference.

“Planning policies should support economic growth in rural areas in order to create jobs and prosperity by taking a positive approach to sustainable new development. To promote a strong rural economy, local and neighbourhood plans should:

promote the retention and development of local services and community facilities in villages, such as local shops, meeting places, sports venues, cultural buildings, public houses and places of worship.”

Further relevant advice is offered in paragraphs 69 and 70 of the NPPF

The planning system can play an important role in facilitating social interaction and creating healthy, inclusive communities. Local planning authorities should create a shared vision with communities of the residential environment and facilities they wish to see. To support this, local planning authorities should aim to involve all sections of the community in the development of Local Plans and in planning decisions, and should facilitate neighbourhood planning. Planning policies and decisions, in turn, should aim to achieve places which promote:

• opportunities for meetings between members of the community who might not otherwise come into contact with each other, including through mixed-use developments, strong neighbourhood centres and active street frontages which bring together those who work, live and play in the vicinity; • safe and accessible environments where crime and disorder, and the fear of crime, do not undermine quality of life or community cohesion; and • safe and accessible developments, containing clear and legible pedestrian routes, and high quality public space, which encourage the active and continual use of public areas.

To deliver the social, recreational and cultural facilities and services the community needs, planning policies and decisions should:

• plan positively for the provision and use of shared space, community facilities (such as local shops, meeting places, sports venues, cultural buildings, public houses and places of worship) and other local services to enhance the sustainability of communities and residential environments; • guard against the unnecessary loss of valued facilities and services, particularly where this would reduce the community’s ability to meet its day- to-day needs; • ensure that established shops, facilities and services are able to develop and modernise in a way that is sustainable, and retained for the benefit of the community; and • ensure an integrated approach to considering the location of housing, economic uses and community facilities and services.

From the foregoing it is apparent that a public house can be rightfully thought of as a community use and there is clearly a tension between the policies and guidance on the - 35 -

one hand which promote the development of homes in sustainable locations in rural areas and those which seek to retain community uses.

The applicant has supplied a viability assessment to support the application which is based upon the Campaign for Real Ales’ Public House Viability Test. The assessment contains a significant amount of details under the following headings:

Assessing Trade Potential Visitor Potential Competition Flexibility of the Site Parking Public Transport Multiple Use Competition Case Studies

With regards ‘The Business at Present’ the applicant has not been able to supply trading figures because he is not a party to them, but believes there has been a lack of financial input into the maintenance and repair of the building over recent years which has been brought about by falling trade which the applicant understands has caused the tenant to find it difficult to maintain the lease obligations.

The Business at Present section also identifies that the premises has been in the present ownership for over 15 years and the current tenant has been in situ for the last ten years.

The Sale section of the assessment identifies that the pub has not been advertised for sale for a number of reasons and it has not been offered for sale as a going concern.

The information and detail which has been supplied by the applicant to support the application is noted and it is acknowledged that there are valid reasons why audited accounts cannot be provided to evidence the viability of the public house. However, it is considered that the submitted evidence is not completely persuasive.

The applicant admits that the tenant in the public house has been conducting a business in the premises for a number of years. It would seem reasonable to assume from the longevity of the occupation that a realistic level of income is being achieved by the tenant; otherwise it would have been likely the tenancy would have changed hands in the past. The applicant has had the opportunity to advertise the public house for sale or offer it for sale as a going concern, but seemingly, these courses of action have not been fully explored. Instead, the applicant has indicated that the premises has been informally offered to a small number of operators who have a narrow criteria in their business model for property acquisition which The Ten O’clock does not comply with.

The policies and guidance relevant to promoting housing development are acknowledged, but it is considered that in the absence of persuasive evidence with regards to the viability of the public house and confirmation of marketing, the policies and guidance which should be accorded more weight on this occasion are those which seek to retain the community use of the premises. - 36 -

Effect on the setting of the listed building With regards the NNCSS, Policy 13 (h) says that new development should be of a high standard of design, architecture and landscaping, respect and enhance the character of its surroundings. Policy (i) goes on to say that 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. Policy (o) continues this theme and states that development should conserve and enhance the landscape character; historic landscape designated built environmental assets and their settings.

With regards to National Planning Policy Framework, the Government states that a listed building is a heritage asset and the Council should treat favourably an application that preserves those elements of the setting that make a positive contribution to, or better reveal the significance of the asset.

The Council’s Design and Conservation Officer has signalled his contentment with the proposal.

It is considered that the proposed development will not harm the setting of the listed building.

Effect on neighbours’ residential amenities It is considered that overall, the use of the building as a dwellinghouse could have less of an impact on the amenity of the nearby residential occupiers than its use as a public house.

Effect on the character of the area It is considered that the illustrated alterations to the building which would be necessary to convert it to houses would not have any significant effect on the visual amenity or character of the area.

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 third parties are noted. With regards to the use of the pub car park by parents and guardians during the school run, it would appear that this is an informal arrangement and seemingly cannot be relied upon. Crucially, the Highway Authority has not objected to the proposal on the grounds of danger to highway safety. Therefore, there is no demonstrable evidence from the Northamptonshire County Council on which to base a highway safety reason for refusal.

Crime and disorder It is considered that there are no pertinent crime and disorder issues relevant to the determination of this application.

- 37 -

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

Conclusion It is considered that the when all the material factors pertaining to the determination of the application have been taken into account and accorded appropriate weight, it is recommended that the application should be recommended for refusal for the reason set out below.

RECOMMENDATION Refuse.

1. The application is considered to be contrary to Policy 13 (f) of the North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy and to the provisions of the National Planning Policy Framework. The applicant has not supplied sufficient information to justify the loss of a community asset with regards to evidence of marketing and viability.

Policy 13

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

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

INFORMATIVE/S: The applicant is advised that this decision relates to the following drawing numbers received on the dates shown: Drawing Numbers: Date Received: B/ML/12/004A, B/ML/12/011, B/ML/12/012 (Location Plan), R12/TLH/01 8 May 2012 B/ML/12/007B, B/ML/12/012 (Elevation to Main Street) 23 May 2012 - 38 -

BOROUGH COUNCIL OF WELLINGBOROUGH

Planning Committee 08/08/2012

Report of the Head of Planning and Local Development

APPLICATION REF: WP/2012/0255/F

PROPOSAL: Retention of a timber cabin (mobile home) for use as a temporary agricultural dwelling and change of use of land for standing of the same (Retrospective Application).

LOCATION: 188 Station Road, Irchester, Wellingborough.

APPLICANT: Mr R Foreman.

This application is referred to the Planning Committee for determination as it is for a retrospective temporary agricultural dwelling in the open countryside and the development has been subject to complaints with regards to whether it first required planning permission.

PROPOSAL AND DESCRIPTION OF SITE: As described.

The Spinney Barns complex is a freehold property owned by the applicant and is registered as an agricultural holding with DEFRA with the County Parish Holding Number 29/288/0056. The business is described as comprising of two main enterprises – the rearing/breeding of rare pigs, free range outdoor kept poultry for eggs and an ancillary enterprise of rearing suckling calves to twelve months. It consists of 1.1 hectares (2.5 acres) of agricultural land currently occupied with two purpose built portal frame agricultural buildings. The applicant also occupies a further 18.2 hectares (45 acres) in two parcels. The site is situated outside the village policy line of Irchester village in open countryside deemed to be agricultural land. It is positioned south of Station Road, west of the railway line and to the east of 180 Station Road.

The mobile home, described as a log cabin, has been on site and in use as residential accommodation since early 2011. It was initially placed on site to provide accommodation during the construction a new agricultural building which benefitted from prior notification (reference: WP/2009/0519) consent. Following the completion of the new agricultural building the mobile home was then occupied as an ‘agricultural’ dwelling by the applicants. Temporary agricultural residential use is now being sought for a period of three (3) years. The applicant has provided a justification statement which summarises the need for the temporary use and siting of the mobile home. Their justification need is based upon four criteria:-

WP/2012/0255/F

Station House 59.7m

Knuston Hill Farm 64.3m A

Track

68.2m

186

182 188

174 MP 62.5

71.1m

STATION ROAD 170

168 160

Path (um)

49 Legend WP/2012/0255/F - 188 Station Road, Irchester Description Planning & Local Track Development © Crown Copyright and database right 2012. Scale: Ordnance Survey 100018694. Applicant's Property This map is accurate 1:1,250 Cities Revealed to the scale specified Aerial Photography copyright: when reproduced at A4 Application Site ± GetMapping PLC 1999 NORMAN WAY - 39 -

• Clear intention to develop the farm enterprise – significant financial investment into the business to develop it into a sustainable enterprise such that a reasonable profit can be achieved at the end of the first three years • Functional need – to cater for the animal husbandry requirements of the rare pigs and other livestock, to be able to respond to essential care and emergencies at short notice, to be able to be on site at short notice, on site security to protect livestock, buildings and equipment from theft or damage • Functional need for agricultural worker accommodation – due to the financial costs of running the business (unable to fund additional casual labour), length of the working day, prohibitive cost and availability of suitable accommodation in the village – low cost on-site accommodation is required to sustain and develop the business • Sound financial basis of the business – to ensure costs are minimized and investment can be sustained to support and grow the business into a sound commercial venture, permanent off-site accommodation is proved to be unattainable at this embryonic phase of the enterprise

It should be noted that the applicants have NOT indicated in their planning application that there is a need for a permanent agricultural dwelling on-site and have stated that a temporary agricultural tie, to enable them to demonstrate that their business plan can work over the three year period, is acceptable and they would have no objections to such a tie.

The mobile home’s external appearance is of tongue and groove timber cladding, stained dark brown. Its roof is mineral felt and its windows are also of dark stained timber. It arrived on-site in its original form with no further internal or external adaptations, sits on unfixed blocks and sleepers that in turn are on removable concrete panels. A water and electricity supply is installed, but gas is supplied by bottle. It was delivered to site in one piece on a rigid bodied lorry and placed by crane. The external dimensions are approximately 10.3 metres long, 3.0 metres wide and 3.0 metres high. A septic tank has been installed to deal with effluent from the mobile home and a raised wooden veranda and decking has been installed around the mobile homes front and side elevations.

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY: WR/1963/0229 Housing site - Refused BW/1989/0192 Residential development - Refused WP/2005/0221 Agricultural building for hay/straw storage – Approved with conditions PRE/2007/0118 One dwelling – Completed (Conclusion - planning permission WILL be required and the NEED for the dwelling would have to proved) WP/2008/0290 Erection of a steel framed agricultural building to adjoin the existing building (60ft x 30ft - height to the eaves of 5 metres) - Withdrawn WP/2009/0027 Erection of a steel framed agricultural building to adjoin the existing building (60ft x 30ft - height to the eaves of 5 metres) - Withdrawn WP/2009/0519 To erect a new general purpose portal frame building 60' x 30' with a 60' x 15' lean-to attached to match existing building - Agreed

- 40 -

NATIONAL GUIDANCE, DEVELOPMENT PLAN POLICY AND SUPPLEMENTARY PLANNING DOCUMENTS/GUIDANCE: National Planning Policy Framework North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy (NNCSS): Policy 1 (Network of Settlements) Policy 8 (Delivering Economic Prosperity) Policy 9 (Distribution and Location of Development) Policy 13 (General sustainable development principles) Policy 14 (Energy efficiency and sustainable construction) Borough of Wellingborough Local Plan: Policy G4 (Restricted Infill Villages) Policy G6 (Development within the open countryside) Supplementary Planning Documents: Northamptonshire Minerals and Waste Development Framework – Development and Implementation Principles Sustainable Design Biodiversity Supplementary Planning Guidance: Planning Out Crime Parking

SUMMARY OF REPLIES TO CONSULTATIONS/REPRESENTATIONS RECEIVED: 1. Irchester Parish Council – raised no objections or comments to the proposal.

2. Third Parties – four responses were received at the time this report was written and the comments cited by the authors are summarized below:-

Occupier of no. 93 Woodlands Road -

• Large numbers of large low loader lorries stop outside the entrance to unload farm equipment • Traffic on road has been stopped twice due to parked low loaders • Due to 30 mph speed restriction, double blind bend in road – entrance not suitable for large farm equipment

Occupier of no. 32 Lodge Road –

• Support

Occupier of no. 62 Station Road -

• Support

Occupier of no. 71 Woodlands Road -

• Building is outside village policy line • Future planning permission may be granted for permanent residential dwelling(s)

- 41 -

3. NCC Highway Authority/PROW – has returned the application with pro forma advice recommending that the highway standards and planning conditions set out in the NCC document ‘Highway Authority Standing Advice’ be applied to this planning application.

The Highway Authority also sent a covering letter advising –

“It is noted that the building and use is existing and has a vehicular access from Station Road. Station Road is subject to a speed limit of 30mph and it is appropriate for vehicle to vehicle visibility of 2.4m x 43m to be provided and maintained in both directions. From my inspection this degree of visibility is available.

To prevent loose material being carried onto the highway it is appropriate for the driveway between the vehicular crossing and the gateway into the property to be paved with a hard bound surface.

Public Footpath TL8 is situated in the vicinity of the site of the Planning Application and may be affected by works associated with the proposal. The following standard requirements should be noted:-

• The routes must be kept clear, unobstructed, safe for users, and no structures or material placed on the right of way at all times, it is an offence to obstruct the highway under Sec36, Highways Act 1980. • There must be no interference or damage to the surface of the right of way as a result of the development. Any damage to the surface of the path must be made good by the applicant, specifications for any repair or surfacing work must be approved by this office, under Sec131, Highways Act 1980. • It may be necessary, in order to carry out the development, to close the Right of Way by way of a Temporary Traffic Regulation Order. An Application form for such an order is available from Northamptonshire County Council website, a fee is payable for this service and a period of six weeks notice is required. Please follow the link below: www.northamptonshire.gov.uk/en/councilservices/transport/row/legal/pages/ temptros.aspx • Any new path furniture (e.g. gates preferred over stile) needs to be approved in advanced with the Access Development Officer, standard examples can be provided.”

4. Northamptonshire Police (Crime and Prevention Design Advisor) –

“Northamptonshire Police has no formal objection to the planning application and can confirm that there have been no reported incidents to the police since the applicant resided on site.”

In response to the applicant’s statement that there is a need to be resident on site to protect property from theft and damage and to avert the potential risk of harm to livestock as there have been previously reported incidents of such activity, Northamptonshire Police have provided confidential evidence which supports the applicant’s claims. - 42 -

5. Councillor Richard Elliott - supports the application and makes the following comments:

“I have walked around the area and was surprised to see pigs in the wood and then to see the buildings – they are all discrete and in keeping with the environment. I am glad to see their current business as a small rural enterprise is progressing and wish them success in the future.

The only concern is if they are granted permanent planning in the future they then may try to get further residential development rights after the agricultural covenants finish.”

6. Environment Agency –

Has no objection to proposed development as the proposed connection to a septic tank is acceptable as a temporary measure.

‘Applicant advice –

Should the residence become permanent additional information should be submitted with any application as set out in Circular 03/99 and specifically Annex A. A ‘Foul Drainage Assessment Form’ (Form FDA/1), will need to be completed and submitted in order to establish whether the proposed non-mains drainage would be acceptable.

DETR Circular 03/99 Planning Requirement in respect of the Use of Non-Mains Sewerage states that "before deciding a planning application, the local planning authority needs to be satisfied that the sewerage arrangements are suitable." The Circular states at Annex A, Paragraph 5 that only if it can be clearly demonstrated by the developer that sewage disposal via public sewer or a package treatment plant is not feasible (taking into account cost and/or practicability) should a system incorporating a septic tank be considered and proposed if appropriate.’

7. Borough Council of Wellingborough Building Control -

“I can advise that Building Control see this as a caravan, therefore, we have no involvement with any part of the installation.”

8. Borough Council of Wellingborough Landscape Officer - no comment received the time this report was written.

9. Borough Council of Wellingborough Environmental Protection – comments received:-

“As a "log cabin" the unit can still be considered as a caravan for the purposes of caravan licensing. There are the legal definitions which have been extended by planning/legal cases.

- 43 -

On a caravan site with more than one unit there are advantages to being legally deemed a caravan. In this case I think the applicant should be asked if the unit is a structure designed or adapted for human habitation which is capable of being moved from one place to another (whether by being towed, or by being transported on a motor vehicle or trailer). If so we should deem it a caravan and we will require a Caravan site licence and conditions to be complied with.

If not it should be deemed a structure to which building regs applies as a dwelling and comply with those standards. (Note: B Regs is required for the septic tank installation in either case).”

10. Network Rail – no comment received.

11. Ramblers Association – ‘we have no comments to make’.

12. Councillor Elliot wrote:-

“Further to the comments by Save Irchester Countryside and the response by NCC Highways advising that the matter of extending the footway should not be pursued. In my view the NCC highways letter of 19 March 2012 makes plain the need for pedestrian to vehicle visibility of 2.4 *2.4m to be maintained on both sides of the footway where it comes over the footway verge to avoid the risk to pedestrians as they cross the access it does not meet the risk to pedestrians if as ma result of this new entrance they are encouraged to go onto the road to avoid it. Mr Jones may well not be aware that there is considerable pedestrian traffic on this road particularly by do walkers accessing nearby permissive footpaths but also children returning from school to houses at the Grange.

The position of the hill which reduces site lines makes it important people can easily use the verge; the extension of the footway would increase pedestrian safety. It would also decrease risks for vehicles entering the site. I therefore hope this matter will be further considered before a decision is made.”

ASSESSMENT: The material planning considerations are:

• Compliance with policy • Effect on the visual amenity of the open countryside • Effect on neighbours’ amenity • Financial and Functional Tests • Highway safety and PROW • Pollution of Controlled Waters • Crime and disorder • Biodiversity

Compliance with policy 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:

- 44 -

• not being capable of being accommodated elsewhere • consisting of a limited number of buildings/structures that are small in scale • including landscaping to minimise visual impact • not resulting in a proliferation of new buildings

The content of the open countryside policy is noted, and on the face of it, the application appears to satisfy the policy criteria as the applicant has demonstrated in his application that temporary accommodation is not currently financially viable and for the purposes of animal welfare issues and site security, temporary accommodation is currently essential. Furthermore, the building constitutes a single structure small in scale to the agricultural buildings currently on-site, is well screened from public view and does not imply that further buildings are likely to be erected. Any such development would first have to be considered through the normal planning application process. Accordingly, the proposal is not considered to be contrary to saved local plan Policy G6.

The other aspects of planning policy and material considerations, such as the NPPF, that are pertinent to this proposal are discussed in more depth in the succeeding sections of this report.

Effect on the visual amenity of the open countryside With regards to NNCSS Policy 13 (h and o) development should be of a high standard of design, architecture and landscaping, respect and enhance the character of its surroundings, and conserve and enhance the landscape character. Policy G6 of the local plan is somewhat diluted in its approach as it would permit development in the open countryside providing the development minimises its adverse impact upon the intrinsic character of the countryside.

The applicant purports to the view that the building is of a high quality design and that the building is in the ‘Green Belt’ and thus the local planning authority should consider this building as an exception as it is for agricultural purposed, in accordance with paragraphs 79 and 89 of the NPPF. This viewpoint is challenged as the site is NOT in a designated ‘Green Belt’ and the building is not considered to be of ‘a high quality design’.

The ‘log cabin’, as described by the applicant, is a purpose built mobile home externally clad in tongue and groove timber, stained dark brown. Its roof is mineral felt and its windows are also of dark stained timber. This type of structure would not be considered to be of an exceptional design that would be expected if presented for a permanent dwelling. At best, it would be deemed as being functional for its temporary purpose. It is considered that the ‘log cabin’ does not enhance the character and appearance of the landscape, but due to its positioning, it being screened by the surrounding trees from the public view, its context in relation to the existing agricultural buildings and that permission is only being sought for a period of three years, then its impact upon the character of the countryside is minimised. At the time this report was written, this Council’s Landscape Officer has remained silent on the issue and no views have been expressed with regards to the log cabin’s impact upon the landscape.

It is opined that the development is contrary to Policy 13 (h and o) of the NNCSS, but is not contrary to local plan Policy G6. As planning permission for the proposed - 45 -

agricultural dwelling (mobile home) is only being applied for a period of three years, then its impact upon the landscape is deemed as being transient. Following the removal of the mobile home from this site at the end of its three year duration and the restoration of the land to its former condition, then this would be a justifiable reason to allow this ‘temporary’ impact on the landscape as an application to site a permanent mobile home (or dwelling house) would most likely not be favourably considered by the local planning authority.

Effect on neighbours’ amenity 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. Paragraph 56 of the NPPF states that: good design should contribute positively to making places better for people.

No representations have been received from neighbouring residents which cite that the development would harm their living conditions. Some have written in support of the scheme, whereas others have expressed the view that the development is outside the village policy line.

Due to the residential nature of the mobile home, its external proportions and relative distance from the closest residential properties, then it is opined that the mobile home will not have any noticeable impact upon the living conditions of the occupiers of these neighbouring properties. Accordingly, the development is not deemed to be contrary to Policy 13 (l).

Financial and Functional Tests In light of the new NPPF, the previous Planning Policy Statement 7 ‘Sustainable Development in Rural Areas’ was cancelled, together with the guidance found in its Annex. Found within the Annex of PPS 7 was guidance on how temporary agricultural dwellings should be assessed. No such guidance is found in the new NPPF. In light of this lack of national policy guidance from the UK Government, the previous guidance contained in Annex A of PPS 7 is used to make an informed assessment of this proposal. However, the weight apportioned to this ‘cancelled’ material consideration is adjusted accordingly to reflect its cancelled status.

Annex A of PPS 7 states the following: -

“If a new dwelling is essential to support a new farming activity, whether on a newly-created agricultural unit or an established one, it should normally, for the first three years, be provided by a caravan, a wooden structure which can be easily dismantled, or other temporary accommodation. It should satisfy the following criteria:

(i) clear evidence of a firm intention and ability to develop the enterprise concerned (significant investment in new farm buildings is often a good indication of intentions);

(ii) functional need (A functional test is necessary to establish whether it is essential for the proper functioning of the enterprise for one or more workers to - 46 -

be readily available at most times. Such a requirement might arise, for example, if workers are needed to be on hand day and night:

(a) in case animals or agricultural processes require essential care at short notice;

(b) to deal quickly with emergencies that could otherwise cause serious loss of crops or products, for example, by frost damage or the failure of automatic systems.)

(iii) clear evidence that the proposed enterprise has been planned on a sound financial basis;

(iv) the functional need could not be fulfilled by another existing dwelling on the unit, or any other existing accommodation in the area which is suitable and available for occupation by the workers concerned; and

(v) other normal planning requirements, e.g. on siting and access, are satisfied.

If permission for temporary accommodation is granted, permission for a permanent dwelling should not subsequently be given unless the following criteria (New permanent dwellings should only be allowed to support existing agricultural activities on well-established agricultural units, providing:

(a) there is a clearly established existing functional need (see paragraph below);

(b) the need relates to a full-time worker, or one who is primarily employed in agriculture and does not relate to a part-time requirement;

(c) the unit and the agricultural activity concerned have been established for at least three years, have been profitable for at least one of them, are currently financially sound, and have a clear prospect of remaining so (see paragraph 8 below)

(d) the functional need could not be fulfilled by another existing dwelling on the unit, or any other existing accommodation in the area which is suitable and available for occupation by the workers concerned; and

(e) other planning requirements, e.g. in relation to access, or impact on the countryside, are satisfied.); are met.

The planning authority should make clear the period for which the temporary permission is granted, the fact that the temporary dwelling will have to be removed, and the requirements that will have to be met if a permanent permission is to be granted. Authorities should not normally grant successive extensions to a temporary permission over a period of more than three years, nor should they normally give temporary permissions in locations where they would not permit a permanent dwelling.” - 47 -

With regard to the above guidance, a comprehensive justification statement, prepared by a Chartered Surveyor (MRICS accredited) appointed by the applicant, was provided with the planning application to support their argument for the siting of a temporary agricultural dwelling on site met the criteria of this guidance. This justification statement is accepted in good faith and no responses were received during the consultation exercise to otherwise contest the information contained in the statement. Without recourse to an equally qualified and experienced BCW employed MRICS Chartered Surveyor to challenge the justification statement as submitted, it is opined that the applicant has demonstrated accordance with the guidance criteria and that all other planning considerations are fulfilled. Notably, the applicant has NOT mentioned in their planning application that there is any intention to retain the mobile home after the three year period has expired.

Highway safety and PROW 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.

An existing access into the site, off Station Road, was established in connection with the agricultural buildings granted consent in 2005 and 2009. The same access is to be utilised for this proposal. To the immediate west of the access lies a public footpath (reference TL8) which runs along the development site’s western boundary.

Comments have been expressed by concerned third parties that large goods vehicles have caused obstructions in the highway when delivering machinery/equipment to the site. Whether these vehicles were directly associated with the ‘Spinney Barns’ business is not proven. However, it is considered that the comments regarding the alleged unauthorised obstruction of a public highway is an enforcement issue under the 1980 Highways Act and it is incumbent for Northamptonshire County Council as the highway authority to enforce against the alleged offenders as necessary. The reports of highway obstruction were reported to both the Highways Authority and Northamptonshire Police for further investigation if they deem it fit to do so.

In response to the highway obstruction allegations received, the applicant advised that the majority of the vehicles concerned were associated with works being undertaken by Network Rail on the railway line adjacent to Spinney Barns, whilst only a very few were in connection with large machinery being delivered to their premises. It should be noted however, that this application is concerned only with the planning merits of a temporary mobile home and, other than a low loader to deliver and remove the mobile home, the only vehicles that would be associated with normal domestic use are thought to consist primarily of cars and occasional vans.

Notably, the Highways Authority (HA) has not objected to the scheme and has expressed certain requirements which the applicant must undertake to ensure that the access has suitable visibility splays and hard surfacing to prevent loose materials being brought onto the highway. Furthermore, the HA has expressed what the applicant’s responsibilities are, and what actions they must undertake, with regards to ensuring that - 48 -

the safety of the users of PROW TL8 is upheld. It is considered that the use of suitable planning conditions and informatives would be sufficient to meet the HA’s requirements.

Pollution of Controlled Waters With reference to NNCSS Policy 13 (q) development should not cause a risk to the quality of the underlying groundwater or surface water on site or elsewhere. As part of the proposed scheme, a septic tank has been installed which empties via a soakaway.

The Environment Agency has responded by stating that they have no objection to the installation of a septic tank, providing that the tank is temporary measure. The Environment Agency have offered further guidance and advice to the applicant as to what they would be required to do if the residence and means of discharging foul water were to become a permanent arrangement. Whether the septic tank requires Building Control consent is an issue which has been reported to this Council’s Building Control service, whom will no doubt address following the outcome of this planning application.

This proposed temporary development is considered not to be contrary to Policy 13 (q) for the reasons outlined above.

Crime and disorder With reference to NNCSS Policy 13 (b) and SPG IV ‘Planning Out Crime’, development should be designed to reduce the potential for antisocial behaviour to occur, criminal activity to occur and to reduce the fear that crime could occur. The inference drawn from the above policy and material considerations is that the development should lead to the prevention or reduction in the likelihood of crime being committed and to enhance the safety of an area through careful consideration of the property’s natural surveillance properties and its design security features.

The applicant provided commentary on previous criminal activity that had occurred at the property prior to the agricultural accommodation first becoming installed and subsequently occupied. Confidential crime statistics provided by Northamptonshire Police have confirmed that criminal activity (theft and damage) has occurred, but no further incidents have occurred since the applicant has resided on site. Furthermore, Northamptonshire Police’s Crime and Prevention Design Advisor have raised no objections to the scheme as proposed.

Due to the embryonic nature of the agricultural business, the need to be in close proximity to livestock to ensure their safety and to protect agricultural machinery and property from theft and damage, then the presence of a temporary agricultural workers’ accommodation on-site would, as evidenced by the Police crime report, be currently serving a real deterrent to crime. As the business develops and achieves a more sound financial footing over the three year period, then it is considered that investment in on- site automated alarms and other security features could be achieved so as to remove the need for on-site accommodation such that more permanent accommodation can be sought in the locality.

Accordingly, this temporary proposal is considered not to be contrary to Policy 13 (b) with the view that any future proposal for a permanent dwelling is not being considered at this time.

- 49 -

Biodiversity There are perceived to be no biodiversity issues pertinent to this proposal and no responses to the publicity and consultation exercise have been received to indicate otherwise.

Conclusion It is accepted that the proposal development will have an effect on the character and appearance of the open countryside, but is considered the weight accorded to the need for the scheme is sufficient to recommend the application for approval with conditions restricting the use to a maximum of three years.

RECOMMENDATION: Approve with conditions.

1. This permission is for a temporary period of three years from the date of this planning permission, and the use hereby permitted shall cease and mobile home building hereby permitted shall be removed on the date by when this temporary planning permission expires, and the land restored to its former condition as existed on or before 19th January 2010. 2. The occupation of the temporary agricultural dwelling shall be limited to a person solely or mainly working, or last working in forestry or agriculture (the latter as defined in Section 336 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990) in the locality, or spouse or dependant of such a person residing with him or her. 3. The first 10 metres of the access road/driveway from the back edge of the highway boundary shall be paved with a hard bound surface and maintained as such thereafter to the satisfaction of the local planning authority. 4. Vehicle to vehicle visibility splays of 2.4 metres x 43 metres shall be provided either side of the vehicular access to the site and maintained as such thereafter to the satisfaction of the local planning authority.

Reasons: 1. The use is not considered suitable as a permanent form of development. 2. To ensure that the occupancy of the dwelling is tied to an agricultural purpose. 3. To prevent loose material from being carried out onto the highway in the interests of highway safety. 4. In the interests of the safety of highway users and pedestrians.

Policy G6 (Development within the open countryside) of the Borough of Wellingborough Local Plan. 2. The applicant is advised that should the residence become permanent additional information should be submitted with any application as set out in Circular 03/99 and specifically Annex A. A 'Foul Drainage Assessment Form' (Form FDA/1), will need to be completed and submitted in order to establish whether the proposed non-mains drainage would be acceptable. DETR Circular 03/99 Planning Requirement in respect of the Use of Non-Mains Sewerage states that "before deciding a planning application, the local planning authority needs to be satisfied that the sewerage arrangements are suitable." The Circular states at Annex A, Paragraph 5 that only if it can be clearly demonstrated by the developer that sewage disposal via public sewer or a package treatment plant is not feasible (taking into account cost and/or practicability) should a system incorporating a septic tank be considered and proposed if appropriate. 3. The applicant is advised that this decision relates to the submitted drawings received on the 24th May 2012 and on the 21st June 2012. 4. The applicant is advised that Public Footpath TL8 is situated in the vicinity of the site of the Planning Application and may be affected by works associated with the proposal. The following standard requirements should be noted:- The routes must be kept clear, unobstructed, safe for users, and no structures or material placed on the right of way at all times, it is an offence to obstruct the highway under Sec36, Highways Act 1980. There must be no interference or damage to the surface of the right of way as a result of the development. Any damage to the surface of the path must be made good by the applicant, specifications for any repair or surfacing work must be approved by this office, under Sec131, Highways Act 1980. It may be necessary, in order to carry out the development, to close the Right of Way by way of a Temporary Traffic Regulation Order. An Application form for such an order is available from Northamptonshire County Council website, a fee is payable for this service and a period of six weeks notice is required. Please follow the link below: www.northamptonshire.gov.uk/en/councilservices/transport/row/legal/pages/tem ptros.aspx Any new path furniture (e.g. gates preferred over stile) needs to be approved in advanced with the Access Development Officer, standard examples can be provided.

- 51 -

BOROUGH COUNCIL OF WELLINGBOROUGH

Planning Committee 08/08/2012

Report of the Head of Planning and Local Development

APPLICATION REF: WP/2012/0269/F

PROPOSAL: Conversion of detached house to 4 flats using existing floor print only with associated parking provision.

LOCATION: 10 Fellows Close, Wollaston, Wellingborough. NN29 7SS

APPLICANT: Mr Michael Walker, McCallum Homes Limited.

The application come before the Planning Committee for determination due to an objection being received Wollaston Parish Council citing overdevelopment as a concern and more than 4 objections having been received from surrounding residence.

PROPOSAL AND DESCRIPTION OF SITE: The development site is located within the village confines of Wollaston to the villages western edge with the A509 bounding the site to west and is positioned at the turning head to Fellows Close.

The property is a single development property constructed in the last 2 years; the proposal is as above and would involve the creation of 4 two bed flats within the existing building, which would also involve the conversion of an existing garage. 1 ground floor unit would enjoy an area of private outside space and the remaining 3 sharing a portion of rear garden. The proposal would also involve the provision of 7 parking spaces off-road to the front.

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY: WP/2006/0540/O Four bedroom detached house – approved with conditions. WP/2008/0349 New dwelling house as approved under the above outline planning permission – approved with conditions.

NATIONAL AND LOCAL PLANNING POLICY: North Northants CSS: 13 SPG: II, IV and V and Design SPD National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) Part 7

WP/2012/0269/F

UNITY CLOSE

13 1

24 MANCHESTER ROAD Tanks 14 Depot El LB Sub 2 Sta

ROSES CLOSE

1 20

GVC 1 5

A 509 9

FELLOWS CLOSE 2

A 509 Cattle Grid

SUMMARY OF REPLIES TO CONSULTATIONS/REPRESENTATIONS RECEIVED: 1. NCC (Highways) -

“To ensure that access for the movements of increased numbers of vehicles can be accommodated, any modification or widening of the vehicular crossing and the reinstatement of all highway surfaces affected by the proposals must be carried out in accordance with the specification of Northamptonshire County Council and subject to a suitable licence or agreement under the Highways Act 1980.

You should satisfy yourself as to the adequacy and layout of parking accommodation proposed to serve the development.”

2. Wollaston Parish Council –

“…objects to the above application on the grounds of overdevelopment”

3. Third Party Objectors -

6 and 7 Fellows Close

“I am writing with concern to the planning application to 10 Fellows Close, Wollaston to convert the present detached property into four flats. I strongly oppose the application for a number of reasons as set out below.

There would be no room for parking as four flats would create a need for up to eight extra vehicle spaces if each flat was occupied by two persons. There is no room on the property for that number of vehicles so they would have to park on the road which is a designated turning area. If relatives or friends visit where would they park. The dustman and other services already have difficulty turning when cars park there. We often get cars left there all day by workers sharing a lift. This sometimes causes great difficulty for myself and other residents trying to reverse out of our driveways.

Vehicles parked outside our properties block the pleasant open views we currently enjoy. The road would be that much busier with a possible safety risk to the young children who play outside. Property prices would likely be devalued in Fellows Close, while the present value of this four bed detached would help increase our property values.”

21 Roses Close

“…wish to object to this proposed development on the grounds of Over development and dense parking provision in the submission”

9 Fellows Close

“We object to the above application on the following grounds:-

- 53 -

1. Re-development of a single detached dwellinghouse in to four flats is excessive over-development of the property.

2. The plan would create a very dangerous precedent, where the Council would not be able to resist the sub-division of ordinary modest sized dwellinghouses in to tiny flats.

3. There will be a destruction of the street scene, in that the whole of the front area will be a parking area, whereas this is a quiet cul de sac of individual residences at the present time.

4. It is likely that people will overspill and park in the turning head, which could pose considerable danger, particularly in the event that fire engines are needed. There is already a potential problem in the turning area, which is often used by non-residents as a car park, with 3-4 cars often parked all day.

We hope, therefore, that the Planning Authority will not permit this application. The only reason the application is being made is that the developer has had the property on the market at too higher price. If it was priced sensibly to sell, it would sell as it is.”

10 Fellows Close “This house although lying empty at the moment would attract the wrong type of residents and additional parking issues and noise in an already busy street.”

8 Fellows Close

“Both my son and I have great concerns about the conversion of number 10 Fellows Close, Wollaston from a four bedroom house into four, two bedroom flats and therefore object to the granting of planning permission. We feel that this conversion will lead to a gross over development of the close from the current ten dwellings to thirteen. This is an increase of 30% which is too dense a concentration too close to our house.

We also have major concerns about parking, the added volume of traffic and the increase in noise that this will bring to the close. The plan shows a proposed seven car parking spaces on the existing drive. There just isn’t the space to manoeuvre seven cars on that drive and potentially there could be eight cars if all the flats are occupied as there could well be two adults per flat with a car each. I suggest you carry out a site visit to verify this.

If this turns out to be the case we would already have one car being permanently parked in the square outside our house, not to mention any visitors with cars, making it difficult to access our drive and that of existing houses in the close. We already have several cars being parked in the cul-de-sac outside our house by commuters who car share.

The increased volume of traffic is also a risk of danger to small children who live and play in the close. - 54 -

This conversion will have an adverse impact on our lives and should not be permitted in as it contravenes General Policy G1 of the Local Plan as follows:

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

WILL NOT AFFECT THE AMENITIES OF ANY NEIGHBOURING PROPERTIES OR RESULT IN WIDESPREAD IMPACT, BY REASON OF NOISE, VIBRATION, SMELL, LIGHT OR OTHER POLLUTION, UNACCEPTABLE LOSS OF LIGHT OR OVERLOOKING;

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

WILL NOT HAVE AN ADVERSE IMPACT ON THE ROAD NETWORK AND WILL NOT PREJUDICE HIGHWAY SAFETY.

We also believe the proposal contravenes Policy H15 (as Wollaston is a Limited Development Village) for the reasons given above:

The Subdivision of Dwellings

POLICY H15

THE CONVERSION OF EXISTING DWELLINGS TO FORM EITHER FLATS OR HOUSES IN MULTIPLE OCCUPATION WILL BE PERMITTED IN THE TOWN, LIMITED DEVELOPMENT VILLAGES AND RESTRICTED INFILL VILLAGES PROVIDED THAT:

SUITABLE PROVISION IS MADE FOR OFF-STREET PARKING, AMENITY SPACE AND NOISE ATTENUATION MEASURES;

THE DEVELOPMENT WILL NEITHER ADVERSELY AFFECT, NOR SET A PRECEDENT WHICH IS LIKELY TO LEAD TO A GRADUAL EROSION IN, THE CHARACTER OF AN AREA; AND

THIS WILL NOT RESULT IN THE LOSS OF A LARGE DWELLING WHERE THERE IS AN UNACCEPTABLE SHORTFALL IN SUCH ACCOMMODATION.”

ASSESSMENT: Principle of Development The property is located in a sustainable settlement with reasonable transport links and facilities therefore the principle of residential properties at this location is accepted.

Impact on Neighbours Amenities The proposed conversion would take place to the dwellings existing shell with no extensions or additional openings to be created to the flank elevations above ground - 55 - floor therefore there are no additional impacts by way of loss of light, loss of privacy or overbearing anymore than would currently be the case should the property be occupied.

Impact on Character and Appearance of Area Fellows Close, including the host property, comprises solely of detached dwellings with the area as a whole consisting of detached or semi-detached dwellings. The application would seek to deviate from the prevailing house type and thereby introducing a form of overdevelopment to the settled form. It is acknowledged that the property is at a prominent position and in terms of its general appearance differs from the rest of the street; however it is respectful of the areas character and density and is not of significant innovation to justify a departure from the established property make-up in the area.

The National Planning Policy Framework indicates that developments should aim to “respond to local character and history, reflect the identity of local surroundings” and goes on to say that it “will function well and add to the overall quality of the area”. It is considered that the proposal is inconsistent therefore with the NPPF and that the development undermines the existing character of the street and introducing an oddity to the established form. In addition the proposal would involve the urbanisation of the front area to accommodate the parking provision this would harm and represent a deleterious impact to the pleasant openness and soft landscaped appearance of Fellows Close and to the village’s entrance and further contradictory to the NPPF where is states that development should be “visually attractive”.

NPPF does suggest that optimal potential for the site and a mix should be encouraged but this is not to be at the expense of the areas intrinsic character. Furthermore the application has failed to demonstrate that there is any particular need for the types of dwellings proposed. It is understood that a local needs assessment established that there would be a requirement for 2 bed apartments for the social rent market but no exercise was undertaken with respect to the private market.

The justification for the development appears to be that the property has not been able to attract a buyer in its current form this may be due to the present market conditions together with its proximity to a busy road and also high aspirations in terms of its value. In the absence of any identified local need this justification is afforded minimal weight and is not considered to outweigh the demonstrable harm caused to the resulting character and appearance of the local environ.

Impact on Local Highway Network The parking provision on-site for 7 vehicles would be appropriate for a development of this size and whilst the parking arrangements appear to be contrived with manoeuvrings difficult and if fully occupied unworkable the highways authority have raised no objections. In the absence of highways objection a refusal reason on highway grounds is not considered justifiable and if attached could result in the award of costs should the decision be subject of an appeal, regardless of whether the decision is upheld.

Other Considerations The biodiversity remains unaffected as does the likely occurrence of crime and the principles of non-discrimination have been followed through-out. The private/shared - 56 -

amenity space provided with the proposal is considered appropriate for this type of residential development.

Response to Representations The comments received with respect to the impact on the local transport network, the perceived overdevelopment of the site and the harm caused to the character and appearance of the area receive discussion above and in the main are concurred with. The policies G1 and H15 of the Borough Council of Wellingborough Local Plan are obsolete having been replaced by policy 13 of the Core Spatial Strategy, therefore the application is not judged against these.

Conclusion In light of the above findings it is considered that the resulting density and type of development is inconsistent with the surrounding character and therefore represents harm unreflective of local identity, in addition the degree of front parking would undermine the pleasant spaciousness of the visually sensitive village approach and Fellows Close. In the absence of any identified need for 2 bed apartments in the private market and notwithstanding the sustainability of the village location there is no justification that outweighs the harm caused. The proposal is therefore considered to be in conflict with Policy 13 (h) of the North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy and inconsistent with the National Planning Policy Framework [para. 58] and is therefore offered with a recommendation for refusal.

RECOMMENDATION: Refuse.

1. The site lies at a prominent location and the proposed development by reason of its increased quantum and the front curtilage being dominated by car parking, would be unreflective of the pattern of development in the surrounding area. The proposed development would therefore undermine the pleasant and spacious appearance of this visually sensitive village approach and as a consequence, be harmful to the character and appearance of the surrounding area. The proposal is therefore considered to be in conflict with Policy 13 (h) of the North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy and inconsistent with the National Planning Policy Framework [para. 58].

Policy 13

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

- 57 -

INFORMATIVE: The applicant is advised that this decision relates to the following drawing numbers received on the date shown: Drawing Number: Date Received: No Drawing Numbers 29 May 2012 - 58 -

BOROUGH COUNCIL OF WELLINGBOROUGH

Planning Committee 08/08/2012

Report of the Head of Planning and Local Development

APPLICATION REF: WP/2012/0300/TX

PROPOSAL: Application for a new planning permission to replace an extant planning permission, in order to extend the time limit for implementation for WP/2009/0251/F - Construction of new detached dwelling with garage and associated external works (revised scheme).

LOCATION: Land between 12 and 18 Bull Close, Bozeat, Wellingborough.

APPLICANT: Mrs Wendy Brealey.

PROPOSAL AND DESCRIPTION OF SITE: In August 2009, the Committee considered and granted consent for this development Ref WP/2009/0251/F. The permission will lapse on the 12th of August if the implementation has not commenced before then. Consent is now sought for an extension to the time limit to enable the implementation of the proposal.

The site is part of the former garden to number 18 Bull Close. At the front of the site, levels generally follow the gradient of Bull Close but rise towards the rear southern boundary by approximately 1 metre, which is formed by a hedge to the adjacent allotment gardens. On the east and west sides the boundaries are formed by existing timber boarded fences under the control of adjoining owners which will remain. There is an existing vehicular access to the site off Bull Close which served a garage when formerly part of number 18.

The proposal is for a single dwelling with attached garage.

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY: WP/2009/0251/F Committee approval for the construction of a detached dwelling with garage and associated external works. WP/2008/0568/F Erection of a single dwellinghouse – approved by the Committee in January 2009. WP/2008/0423/F Withdrawn. WP/94/0366 New detached garage – considered to be permitted development.

WP/2012/0300/TX 35

33a 33

30 54 46 El Sub

26 Sta

13 15 65

HOPE STREET 14

64 12

1a 2

COUNCIL STREET 81

2b 2a

21 18 76

17 11 12 10

7 8

BULL CLOSE6 27 5

3 1

Allotment Gardens Track

14 16

Path (um)

20 22

20a ALLENS HILL

24 26

1 28 12

PEAR TREE

19 CLOSE 6

8 4

Church View

21 Hall

23 Planning & Local 40 Development © Crown Copyright and database right 2012. Scale: Ordnance Survey 100018694. Legend This map is accurate 1:1,250 Cities Revealed to the scale specified Aerial Photography copyright: when reproduced at A4 ± GetMapping PLC 1999 WP/2012/0300/TX - Land between 12 and 18 Bull Close, Bozeat - 59 -

NATIONAL AND LOCAL PLANNING POLICY: National Planning Policy Framework Wellingborough Local Plan Policy G4 - Villages North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy: Policy 7 - Delivering Housing Policy 9 - Distribution and Location of Development Policy 10 - Distribution of Housing Policy 13 - General Sustainable Development Principles

SUMMARY OF REPLIES TO CONSULTATIONS/REPRESENTATIONS RECEIVED: 1. Bozeat Parish Council - Bozeat Parish Council oppose this application and urges the Borough Council of Wellingborough not to renew this permission. After the windfarm this the most hard fought proposal in the Parish for many years because it would cause or exacerbate a number problems in Bull Close. We also consider that the design constitutes an over‐development of the site that will have an overbearing effect on nearby properties. Whilst we felt that the original application should have been refused, we understood that the aggressive housing targets and top‐down planning regime in place at the time could have meant that the Council felt under pressure to approve the previous application. However, the current planning context is very different because of the advent of the NPPF and Localism. In addition the NNJPU are currently revising down housing targets for the county to achievable levels.

The NPPF (section 7) requires that development should be of a good design and add to the overall quality of the area establishing s strong sense of place. We feel that this proposal significantly detracts from the quality of the immediately neighbouring properties, is neither visually attractive and nor of a good design. The history of this proposal should make it abundantly clear that it has caused acrimony rather than contributing to social cohesion. Paragraph 64 of the NPPF states:

Permission should be refused for development of poor design that fails to take the opportunities available for improving the character and quality of an area and the way it functions.

We feel that this clearly indicates that the NPPF requires that this application should be refused. Should you be minded to grant this extension we would reiterate our request that conditions should be attached to ensure that other residents of this unadopted close do not incur any costs as a consequence of its development and that the disruption to their lives is kept to a minimum. The facts also show that due to lack of progressing the site into a sustainable development there is no pressing need to retain this unsuitable and extremely unpopular proposal.

Bozeat Parish Council requests a visit by the site viewing group in this instance.

2. The occupiers of 19 Bull Close - we are the occupiers of 19, Bull Close, directly opposite the land which is the subject of this planning application. As we understand it, this current application is for a new planning consent to effectively - 60 -

extend the period for implementation of the Planning Permission ref WP/2009/0251/F granted on 9th July 2009.

As you will be aware we have consistently argued against the granting of permission for a detached house on this site for the following reasons, all of which, we believe, remain relevant:

• The Site is not of sufficient area to accommodate a detached family size dwelling without causing detrimental impact to neighbouring properties nor to enable the property to be built in an aesthetically pleasing manner with low impact on the surroundings. This is evidenced by our request during previous planning application processes, that the new house be sited as far back and as low down on the site as possible whilst the neighbours in nos 12 & 18 requested that the new house be sited as far forward as possible to avoid overlooking their rear gardens. The fact that the resultant proposal that received permission in July 2009 has not been built or commenced 3 years later indicates that the design solution arrived at to resolve this dichotomy is necessarily unsatisfactory to any developer or prospective resident.

• Bull Close has suffered in recent years from overdevelopment of land which was formerly a garden to No. 8 with the loss of substantial trees and hedges and the introduction of an out of character unsightly house surrounded by cars parked on hardstanding. The current proposal for land which was formerly garden to no. 18, continues this trend to turn Bull Close, a road previously of distinctive local character into yet another housing estate.

• The building of a house on the land between 12 & 18 Bull Close will completely close in the top of Bull Close changing the nature of the road for the existing residents.

• Bull Close is used by many pedestrians as at the top it continues as a footpath through to Fulwell Rd. Bull Close is narrow, approx 4m wide, with no pavements. Vehicle movements in the road are dangerous to pedestrians, especially if cars are forced to reverse, due to congestion at the top of the road. The introduction of more vehicles in the road, which will naturally follow the building of a new dwelling, should be discouraged. In addition there is no turning space at the top of Bull Close and cars that are forced to reverse out are dangerously reversing on to the main road over a pavement and out between parked cars.

• In periods of heavy rainfall the surface water drainage of Bull Close can prove inadequate and the introduction of further hard landscaped areas as part of this development will only exacerbate this problem.

• As referred to above, we have consistently requested that any development of this land takes due account of the proximity of our 5 front windows, our privacy, and the natural light to the front rooms of our house that we currently enjoy and therefore that any development be designed to be as far back on the Site as possible and also as low lying as possible. I believe no 12 was designed in this manner in the 1990’s to avoid similar difficulties to our - 61 -

neighbouring joined property no 17. Whilst the current application is for the renewal of the existing permission we have been advised by a prospective purchaser of the land that once the planning permission is renewed he will seek to raise the ridge height of the property and we will continue to argue against this.

3. The occupiers of 12 Bull Close - thank you for your letter of 20th June 2012 informing us of a request to extend the time limit on planning permission granted three years ago to allow building on the infill of land between 12 and 18 Bull Close, Bozeat.

Our objections have not changed from our previous letter of 2009 which is attached.

If anything we were lead to believe that “infill’s” had been made harder to obtain now that a new government was in power.

That said, other things must be taken into consideration:

For an applicant to file a planning permission on an extremely small envelope of land with a view to building a house for their personal residence, then 3 years is ample time to get things organised and built. The main reason nothing has happened here is that the applicant has been trying to sell the land with outline permission without taking into consideration the current market prices and now there may be “something on the horizon”, they are desperate to get this extension and appease the potential buyer.

Whatever the decision of the council, the fact remains that the plot is too small to erect a huge 2 and a half height construction and still contain all of the facilities required, garaging, hard standing for other vehicles, vehicles being able to turn around within the boundaries, etc.

We must remember that Bull Close was, and to some extent, still is, an ally way. It is barely wide enough for one car as it was never meant to be a residential area. The council have realised this by never adopting it.

Allens Hill is a constant danger, especially in the evenings, when it is a mini car park which includes vehicles that cannot be parked at properties in Bull Close. This will only get worse.

More development within Bull Close will only make matters worse and not improve the character or quality of the area.

We would request that the council give this application a long and hard scrutiny and see that it is now outside the original legislation and action by the applicant should have been completed within the previous timeframe, coming to the conclusion that this extension be rejected.

- 62 -

4. The occupiers of no. 21 Bull Close - our main objections for the time extension are

1. 3 years is ample time in which to construct a property. If a 3 year permission was seen as adequate when it was granted, then we see no reason why it should be extended now. 2. The original permission came with the condition that prior to commencement of the development full details of the dormer windows would be submitted and approved. As you have confirmed to us via e-mail these details have not yet been submitted, which would suggest to us that the applicant had no immediate plans to develop from the beginning. 3. At the planning meeting the applicant stated that she planned to live in the property once it was developed. As the land was put up for sale shortly afterwards, we don’t think that this was ever the case. We believe that the applicant was trying to obtain planning permission for the largest possible property in order to maximise the sale price of the land. 4. We have been contacted by a possible purchaser of the land who informs us that once the time extension is granted he will then apply to have the ridge height of the property increased. As we fought long and hard to get it reduced we are obviously unhappy with his plan.

Our original objections also remain

1. There are already problems with access and parking in Bull Close. Bull Close is an old road and not suitable for large volumes of vehicles. 2. Allens Hill, onto which Bull Close joins, is already snarled up with cars on a regular basis, many of them an overflow from Bull Close. This greatly reduces the visibility when exiting Bull Close making it hazardous. Another property could easily increase this problem. 3. The plans submitted allow for 2 cars to park – one behind the other. There is no room for turning on the driveway. Bull Close is only 4 metres wide, making turning in the road difficult. If any cars are parked on the road, it makes turning impossible. Reversing down Bull Close is extremely difficult and hazardous for pedestrians as there is no separate footpath. 4. Many properties have more than 2 vehicles and all properties have visitors. Where will these additional cars park? 5. There are already drainage problems in Bull Close with additional streams of water running down the footpath from Fullwell Road in heavy rain, which then pools at the drains. Another property on the Close will only increase this problem. 6. As the original plans require excavation in order to get the 3 storey height of the property, we think that this will cause problems for the property owners as the water will run off the road and onto their frontage. 7. The building planned is too large for the plot, being extremely tall and taking up most of the land. It is considerably taller than the house opposite it – only a few metres away. 8. Bull Close is already overdeveloped and losing it’s character – another property will only make this worse. 9. The property planned is not in keeping with the houses at the top of the Close. - 63 -

It is our opinion that the best use of this land is to return it to it’s original purpose, being garages and parking space. Could you please take all these matters into consideration when making a decision on extending the planning permission.

5. The occupier of no. 81 Fulwell Road – expressed concerns about the parking and access problems in Fulwell Road.

6. The occupiers of 18 Bull Close -

“With reference to the above, we apologise for sending this letter in late. We did email an objection letter on 7th July 2012 but it appears not to have been received as it is not displayed hence why we have re-sent it in the hope that you will accept this letter as we have had a broadband problem over the past few weeks.

We would like to object to the planning of the large detached house between our property (18 Bull Close) and 12 Bull Close. Almost all our original concerns that were previously submitted 3 years ago (WP/2009/0251) are still valid and are summarised below:

1. The impact on privacy to our house due to the amount of windows overlooking our property. The plans that were approved show a total of 8 windows that will overlook our property. 2 windows on the side elevation east, 3 windows on the 1st floor rear elevation south and 2 extremely large 1350mm dormer (and 1 smaller window) on the top floor rear elevation south. The privacy impact on our garden in particular with the huge dormer windows overlooking is unacceptable as 18 Bull Close has benefited from this private garden for 120 years and this was one of the reasons we purchased the property. 2. The light being obstructed to the 2 downstairs rooms of our property due to the size and close proximity of the new property. The close proximity and ridge height of the proposed dwelling & garage will reduce the light coming into our sitting room facing south and the front west facing windowed door to the lounge from midday onwards. 3. The lack of turning space into the proposed land creating an even greater hazard on an already seriously overcrowded road. Whilst accepting that the width of Bull Close adds to its charm & character, parking and manoeuvrability of vehicles is always a challenge but construction of the proposed property compounds the problem not just for the residents of the proposed dwelling (i.e. 2 cars parked in front of the house with no space to turn) and the concern of vehicle/pedestrian segregation because Bull Close is inhabited by children who enjoy the relative safe area to play with no passing traffic. In addition to this, the construction phase of the property would need to be carefully planned and considered as Bull Close is an un-adopted road and is clearly not designed for any large vehicles, particularly heavy construction traffic transporting building materials, plant, equipment and the numerous sub-contractors who will inevitably need access at various times and stages of the construction. - 64 -

4. The proposed 600mm wall to the front of the applicant¿s property will cause severe difficulty entering our drive. The available turning space is limited and if the construction of a wall will not only make it extremely difficult to enter our drive but also difficult for the occupants of the proposed dwelling to enter their drive.

Whilst we ultimately have no objection to a property being built on this land, as it has been left derelict, unattended and overgrown for many years and is currently a mess.

The fact remains that the plans that have been submitted for this large house with a footprint of 10,645 x 10,050 is just too big for the available land and other important environmental considerations of its location which are articulated in our letter and I am sure other neighbours letters too.

The ridge house is another factor of major contention for the size of this property due to it overlooking and blocking the right of light to the houses opposite and any remediation to the height of the ridge i.e. placing the house further back or reducing the ground level will create a detrimental affect on 18 Bull Close also.

No doubt if planning permission is granted again then there will be further planning applications to raise the height of the ridge.

Finally, the previously submitted Design & Access Statement¿ highlighted the proposals falls within relevant planning strategy and policy and reference to PPS1, PPS3 and PPS 7, though these requirements state that ¿all development in rural areas should be well designed and inclusive, in keeping and scale within its location and sensitive to the character of the countryside and local distinctiveness¿, to which these plans do not indicate that the proposed property is well designed or inclusive in scale within its location.”

ASSESSMENT: Section 38(6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 replaces section 54(A) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 and states that if regard is to be had to the development plan for the purpose of any determination under the Planning Act, the determination must be made in accordance with the prevailing plan, unless material considerations indicate otherwise.

Although the relevant development plan policies have not changed since the last application was determined in 2009, there has been a change to national policy with the publication of the National Planning Policy Framework in the last few months, which has replaced the Planning Policy Statements 1, 3 and 7 that were relevant to the consideration of the 2009 application.

Unlike the previous national guidance (PPS 3), the new national policy framework excludes land within residential curtilage from the definition of brownfield sites. This notwithstanding, a development of this nature can still be considered acceptable if the design, layout and form are in keeping with those of the surrounding area. An assessment of the proposal along these lines would be consistent with the expectations of Policy G4 of the Local Plan and Policy 13 of the Core Strategy. - 65 -

Policy G4 states that in villages, permission will be granted if the proposal is within the village policy lines; and if it will not individually or cumulatively with other proposals have an adverse impact on the size, form and character of the village. The proposal fulfils these criteria. The proposal’s site coverage, its layout and design and entirely in keeping with the character, form and appearance of the surroundings.

The other issues raised by the proposal have been addressed in the report that was presented to the Committee in 2009. However, extracts of the report in relation to the issues are reproduced below.

Character and Appearance The dwellings in Bull Close exhibit no common architectural theme, but they are mainly 2-storeys in height. The proposed building is similar in all respects to the newly constructed dwelling at no. 10 Bull Close, which is 2 storeys in height, but with accommodation in the roof area. The building line on this frontage is also not well defined, although the proposed building seeks to follow the building line of the nearby no. 18. In the circumstances, the proposed development is acceptable in design and layout terms. There are concerns that the accumulation of infill developments undermines the character and appearance of the area. If indeed the immediate area had a spacious feel, this has indeed been eroded over time, with several infill developments approved and built. Judging by the prevailing character and appearance therefore, the proposed development is certainly acceptable.

Facing materials. The details of facing materials are satisfactory. There is no single predominant brick type used in the construction of dwellings in the surrounding area. Indeed some dwellings are constructed with red bricks, whilst others at nos. 21, 16 and 18, Masons Lodge at no. 17, 19 Bull Close and the side elevation of no. 29 Allens Hill (facing Bull Close) appear to have stone/yellow brick facades. The façade at no. 13 Bull Close is rendered. The proposed palette of external materials – Drayton Cream facing brick with reconstituted stone cills, slate roof and lead clad dormers are of a quality, texture and colour that will sit comfortably in the Bull Close street scene. In the circumstances, the proposed facing materials would not have a noticeable adverse impact on the appearance of the street scene and ought to be approved.

Boundary treatments. These are also acceptable and the majority of the existing features are in any case not under the control of the applicants. The 1.8m high close boarded fencing and the low brick wall at the front of the site are in keeping with those used elsewhere in the area.

Parking and Highway A garage would be provided at the side of the house and this is acceptable. The Highway Authority have not expressed any concerns in terms of the adequacy or inadequacy of the existing access.

Amenity Impact The proposed ridge height of the building has been reduced by 860mm from the previous scheme (approved in January 2009), and this has been achieved by a combination of design changes including reduction in the depth of the building by 550mm, reduction in height of the roofspace storey, and lowering the ground floor level - 66 -

of the building into the ground. These changes also reduce the eaves line of the proposed building by 685mm from the previous scheme. The setting out position of the front of the proposed house in relation to the front corner of number 12 is maintained exactly as the previous scheme. The submitted drawings demonstrate these level changes, and dimensions.

Consequently, the proposed dwelling has a lower ridge height than the approved dwelling and this is of some benefit in terms of impact on neighbouring dwellings. A condition is recommended to ensure that no additional windows or openings are inserted on the flank elevations to prevent mutual overlooking.

Conclusion DCLG Circular 03/2009 provides guidance on situations where costs may be awarded for unreasonable behaviour by a planning authority. Paragraph B29 sets out examples of circumstances which may lead to an award of costs against a planning authority. This includes a situation where the authority fails to grant permission for a scheme the subject of an extant or recently expired permission where there has been no material change in circumstances. This situation applies to this proposal. There has been no change to the development plan and the proposal is not in conflict with the main provisions in the new National Planning Policy Framework. Therefore, there can be no substantive reasons for declining the application and if consent is not granted, an appeal is likely to be successful with cost awarded against the Council.

RECOMMENDATION: Grant permission subject to the following conditions:

1. The development shall be begun not later than the expiration of three years beginning with the date of this permission. 2. No windows or other openings (other than those already approved as part of this development) shall be formed on the flank elevations of the proposed building without the prior written consent of the local planning authority. 3. The garage and the car parking space shown on the approved drawing shall be provided before the occupation of the dwelling and shall thereafter be kept free from obstruction and shall be retained for parking purposes incidental to the enjoyment of the approved dwelling, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the local planning authority. 4. Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995 (or any other Order revoking or re-enacting this Order), no buildings, extensions or alterations permitted by Classes A, B, C, D and E of Part 1 of Schedule 2 of the Order shall be carried out within the curtilage of the approved dwellinghouse without the prior written consent of the local planning authority. 5. Before the development commences, an Environmental Risk Assessment (ERA) to identify any contaminants shall be submitted to the local planning authority for approval. Should the ERA identify any contamination, it shall contain measures for its remediation that shall be approved in writing by the local planning authority. The site shall be remediated to the satisfaction of the local planning authority prior to the occupation of the development.

- 67 -

Reasons: 1. Required to be imposed pursuant to S51 of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004. 2. To protect the amenities of the neighbouring residential occupiers. 3. To ensure adequate off-street parking provision and in order to prevent additional parking in Bull Close, which could be detrimental to amenity and prejudicial to safety. 4. To allow the local planning authority the opportunity to control future developments on the site, having regard to nature of the site and in the interest of safeguarding the amenities of neighbouring occupiers. 5. In the interests of health and safety of the future occupiers of the dwelling.

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: Wellingborough Local Plan Policy G4 - Villages North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy: Policy 7 - Delivering Housing Policy 9 - Distribution and Location of Development Policy 10 - Distribution of Housing Policy 13 - General Sustainable Development Principles 2. The applicant is advised that this decision relates to the following drawing numbers received on the date shown: Drawing Numbers: Date Received: A354/100, A354/10A, A354/11A 09/07/2009 3. In the interest of crime prevention and reducing the likelihood of disorder and anti-social behaviour, the Northamptonshire Police have recommended the following: * All external doors should comply to British Standard PAS 24-1 doors for enhanced Security; * All windows should comply to BS7950; and * The boundary treatment should be 1.8m height to protect the perimeter of each house. - 68 -

BOROUGH COUNCIL OF WELLINGBOROUGH

OTHER BOROUGH

Planning Committee 08/08/2012

Report of the Head of Planning and Local Development

APPLICATION REF: WP/2012/0298/OB

PROPOSAL: Full Application: 1 no. 77m high wind turbine with access track, hard standing area, electricity substation and associated works.

LOCATION: Aspenfield, Main Street, Orton.

APPLICANT: Mr O Kirkham, Ecotricity (Next Generation) Limited.

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

PROPOSAL AND DESCRIPTION OF SITE: As described above.

The proposed development will consist of a single three bladed wind turbine with maximum dimensions of 77 metres in height to the blade tip, situated approximately 1km to the west of the village of Orton in Northamptonshire. In addition to the wind turbine, there will be a number of other components to the development, described below;

• a short section of new access track (approximately 210m) • a crane hardstanding, approximately 15 x 35m • a switchgear building (approximately 10m x 5m and single story in height) and associated underground cabling which will be used to connect the turbine to the local grid network • a temporary construction compound, approximately 30m x 40m

The proposed turbine will be situated on agricultural land (Grade 2), currently used as arable production. The total landholding of Aspenfield Farm is approximately 110 acres. The location of the proposed turbine will lie at approximately 140 metres above sea level.

The site lies on elevated plateau adjacent to the A14 dual carriageway. There are a number of isolated farms in the surroundings and a couple of small villages (Orton to the North East and Loddington to the East). The town of Rothwell lies approximately 3km to the north east of the site. A minor road borders the site to the south. The nearest third party residential property (Dropshot Cottage) is located approximately WP/2012/0298/OB - 69 -

555m to the south west of the proposed turbine. The villages of Orton and Loddington lie approximately 1km to the north east 2km to the east of the proposed turbine respectively.

There are thought to be no ‘sensitive areas’ (SPA’s, SAC’s, Ramsar sites, SSSI’s, AONB’s, World Heritage Sites or Scheduled Monuments) within the site boundary. The closest site of ecological designation is Birch Spinney and Mawsley Marsh SSSI (designated for its botanically rich grassland and marsh), approximately 2.4km to the south east of the proposed turbine.

The proposed development does not lie in or near to any designated landscape areas. There are a number of Listed Buildings within 5km of the site, however the closest is over 1km away, being the Grade II listed Manor Farmhouse in Orton. The Grade II* listed building, The Orton Trust Workshop, is also in Orton, just over 1.1km form the proposed turbine. The closest Conservation Area within 5km of the site is in Loddington, approximately 1.8km from the proposed turbine. There are two Scheduled Monuments (SAMs) within 5km of the site, the closest of which is the site of a Manor House 2.6km to the north west of the site.

Wind turbines convert the kinetic energy of wind to electrical energy by rotating the generator in the turbine nacelle (hub) as the wind passes over the aerodynamically designed blades. The electrical energy is then fed directly into the local electrical grid system (usually 11kV). The proposed turbine for this application is the EWT 54 500kW wind turbine. It should be noted that the exact choice of wind turbine will be made post planning, adhering to the maximum dimensions as specified in this planning application. However, the EWT 54 is standard for a wind turbine of this type and will therefore be used as the candidate turbine for the criteria assessed in this planning application. The tip height of chosen turbine will not exceed 77m.

The colour of the turbine will be an industry standard non-reflecting semi-matt off-white so as to blend into the skyline.

The applicant/agent have tried to consult with the MOD (Pro-forma submitted 15th April 2011) on this proposed turbine prior to a planning application being submitted. However the MOD has stated that it will not be able to offer a comment on this application till a planning application is submitted. It is possible that the MOD will request the following lighting on the hub of the turbine which is typical for this type of development: ‘25 candela omni-directional red lighting or infrared lighting with an optimised flash pattern of 60 flashes per minute of 200ms to 500ms duration at the highest practicable point’. This is a standard specification requested for wind turbines. If this request is made by the MOD an infrared light will be installed. The infrared light will not be visible to the naked eye (it is only visible with night vision equipment) and there will be no other permanent lighting required for the development.

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY: None.

- 70 -

NATIONAL, REGIONAL AND LOCAL PLANNING POLICY: National and Regional Policy. As this application is being determined by Kettering Borough Council (KBC) then compliance with national and regional policies rests with KBC.

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

North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy 2008: • Policy 13 – General Sustainable Development Principles; • Policy 14 – Energy Efficiency and Sustainable Construction.

SUMMARY OF REPLIES TO CONSULTATIONS/REPRESENTATIONS RECEIVED: No consultations undertaken as this is another borough planning application consultation only.

ASSESSMENT: The material planning considerations are:

• Compliance with policy; • Other material planning matters.

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

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

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

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

- 71 -

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

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

RECOMMENDATION: Offer no objection and would advise that the material planning matters that KBC should endeavour to explore during their consultation exercise with the relevant consultees prior to determining this application are considered to be:

- 72 -

BOROUGH COUNCIL OF WELLINGBOROUGH

FOR INFORMATION

Planning Committee 08/08/2012

Report of the Head of Planning and Local Development

APPLICATION REF: WP/2011/0442/C

PROPOSAL: Replacement of extant planning permission KE/05/790 and WP/05/584 to extend the time limit for the implementation of the A509 Isham Bypass.

LOCATION: Land to the West of the Village of Isham, A509, Isham, Kettering.

APPLICANT: Northamptonshire County Council.

NOTE: This consent supersedes and updates the previous planning permission for the site, reference KE/05/790 & WP/05/584.

Time Limit 1. The development hereby permitted shall be begun no later than the expiration of TEN YEARS from the date of this permission.

REASON: To conform with the requirements of Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 as amended by the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004.

Scope of Permission 2. Except as otherwise required by conditions attached to this planning permission the development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the submitted application i.e.

• Application Forms dated 26 May 2011; • Planning Support Statement received on 5 September 2011; • Supplementary Planning Support Statement • A509 Isham Bypass Pre-Construction Ecological Survey Report (Additional) dated December 2008; • A509 Isham Bypass Northamptonshire PPS 25 Flood Risk Assessment Addendum dated October 2009; • Environmental Statement Volume 1 - Text; • Environmental Statement Volume 2 - Drawings; • Environmental Statement Volume 3 - Appendices; • Drawing No. 28 Revision B Planning Application Section Winston Drive; • Drawing No. 51 Revision F Scheme Plan; • Drawing No. 66 Revision B Planning Application Site Plan Sheet 1 of 2; WP/2011/0442/C - 73 -

• Drawing No. 66 Revision B Planning Application Site Plan Sheet 2 of 2; • Drawing No. LS-A509-001 Revision C Landscape Master Plan; • Drawing No. LS-A509-002 Revision C Landscape Master Plan; • Drawing No. LS-A509-003 Revision C Landscape Master Plan; • Drawing No. LS-A509-004 Revision C Landscape Master Plan; • Drawing No. 1528-002 Revision A General Arrangement Pytchley Brook Culvert; • Drawing No. 5051674-012/01/1700 Revision C General Arrangement The Ruts Accommodation Bridge; • Drawing No. 5051674-012/03/1700 Revision D General Arrangement Orlingbury Road Overbridge; • Drawing No. 5051673-015/1531/02 Revision D General Arrangement Hardwick Brook Culvert; • Drawing No. 5051673-012/02/1700 Revision C General Arrangement Frisby Lodge Accommodation; • Drawing No. 5051673-012/04/1700 Revision C General Arrangement Hill Top Road Footbridge; • Drawing No. IB02/08/223 Revision D Balancing Ponds; • Drawing No. 72 Revision B Planning Application Site Plan; • Drawing No. IB02/08/212 Revision C Road Markings, Traffic Signs, Street Lighting & Safety Fencing Sheet 1 of 3; • Drawing No. IB02/08/213 Revision A Road Markings, Traffic Signs, Street Lighting & Safety Fencing Sheet 2 of 3; • Drawing No. IB02/08/214 Revision 0 Road Markings, Traffic Signs, Street Lighting & Safety Fencing Sheet 3 of 3; • Drawing No. IB02/08/200 Revision A Site Location; • Drawing No. SD/1/4/1 Routeing Sign Type 1; • Appendix 1/9 Control of Noise & Vibration; • Options for Noise Mitigation to Properties at Winston Drive & Fairfield Road, Isham; • Drawing No. IB02/08/218 Revision A Accommodation Works Sheet 1 of 3; • Drawing No. IB02/08/219 Revision A Accommodation Works Sheet 2 of 3; • Drawing No. IB02/08/220 Revision B Accommodation Works Sheet 3 of 3; • A509 Isham Bypass Pre-Construction Ecological Survey Report (Additional) dated September 2011; • A509 Isham Bypass Pre-Construction Ecological Survey Report (Additional) - Badger Survey Results dated September 2011;

REASON: To define the scope of the permission and in the interest of clarity.

Landscaping 3. The bypass shall be landscaped and planted with hedgerows, trees and shrubs in accordance with a comprehensive scheme which shall be submitted no later than the commencement of the works for approval in writing by the County Planning Authority. The scheme as approved shall be implemented concurrently with the development and shall be completed no later than the first planting season following the substantial completion of the development, or as may otherwise be agreed. Any hedgerow plants, trees of shrubs removed, dying, being seriously damaged or becoming seriously diseased within five years of - 74 -

planting shall be replaced by trees and shrubs of similar size and species to those originally required to be planted, or such other species as may be agreed.

REASON: In the interest of visual and residential amenity with regard to Policy 13 of the North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy (2008).

Materials 4. The road shall be constructed utilising a low road noise surface material as proposed in the submitted application and all maintenance thereafter shall utilise the same type of low road noise construction materials.

REASON: In the interest of residential amenity with regard to Policy 13 of the North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy (2008).

Lighting 5. Prior to the commencement of construction works a scheme of all lighting provision related to the development hereby permitted is required to be submitted to, and approved in writing by the County Planning Authority. The scheme as approved shall include details of the types and height of lights and/or light columns, their location, technical specification, means of preventing or minimizing light spillage and the proposed hours of use.

REASON: In the interest of residential amenity with regard to Policy 13 of the North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy (2008).

Hours of Working 6. Prior to the commencement of the development a scheme for the hours of construction works on site shall be submitted to the County Planning Authority for approval in writing, and thereafter implemented in accordance with the approved scheme.

REASON: To ensure that working on site is carried out within reasonable hours so as to avoid disturbance to nearby residential properties with regard to Policy 13 of the North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy (2008).

Geotechnical Survey 7. Prior to the commencement of the development a full geotechnical survey must be carried out to identify the appropriate engineering works to ensure stability of all cuttings and embankments, and ground stability for adjacent land uses. Details of these works shall be submitted to the County Planning Authority for approval in writing.

REASON: In the interest of residential amenity with regard to Policy 13 of the North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy (2008).

Construction Traffic 8. Prior to the commencement of the development a scheme for the routing and control of construction traffic shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the County Planning Authority. The approved scheme shall be implemented and thereafter maintained during the construction of the bypass. - 75 -

REASON: In the interest of amenity and highway safety with regard to Policy 13 of the North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy (2008).

9. Prior to the commencement of development all temporary access, construction and accommodating works shall be submitted to the County Planning Authority for approval in writing and thereafter maintained.

REASON: In the interest of amenity and highway safety with regard to Policy 13 of the North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy (2008).

Machinery Noise Suppression 10. All plant, equipment and machinery used on site for the road construction, including vehicular traffic to and from the site, shall be designed and maintained to reduce noise levels to a minimum and shall be operated in accordance with manufacturer's instructions. All plant, equipment and machinery used on site, including vehicular traffic, which is capable of being fitted with the appropriate silencers, baffles, cladding and rubber linings shall be so fitted and maintained.

REASON: To minimise noise disturbance to local residents with regard to Policy 13 of the North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy (2008).

Wheel Cleaning 11. No vehicle used in connection with the road construction works shall enter the public highway unless it's wheels and chassis are clean, to prevent the deposit of mud, slurry or other debris.

REASON: In the interest of highway safety and to prevent mud and dust getting onto the highway with regard to Policy 13 of the North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy (2008).

Dust 12. During the road construction works suitable measure, including the use of water spray facilities in periods of dry weather shall be adopted to ensure that dust is kept to a minimum on the site and temporary access, construction and accommodation roads.

REASON: To safeguard the local environment and protect the amenities of local residents from unreasonable dust levels with regard to Policy 13 of the North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy (2008).

Vehicle Sheeting 13. All vehicles transporting materials to and from the site in connection with the road construction works shall be securely sheeted in such a way to ensure that no material is deposited on the public highway.

REASON: To safeguard the interest of users of the public highway with regard to Policy 13 of the North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy (2008).

- 76 -

Archaeology 14. No development shall take place until the applicant has secured the implementation of a programme of archaeological work in accordance with a written scheme of investigation which has been submitted by the applicant and approved by the County Planning Authority.

This written scheme will include the following components, completion of each of which will trigger the phased discharging of the condition:

(i) fieldwork in accordance with the agreed written scheme of investigation;

(ii) post-excavation assessment (to be submitted within six months of the completion of fieldwork, unless otherwise agreed in advance with the County Planning Authority);

(iii) completion of post-excavation analysis, preparation of site archive ready for deposition at a store approved by the County Planning Authority, completion of an archive report, and submission of a publication report to be completed within two years of the completion of fieldwork, unless otherwise agreed in advance with the County Planning Authority.

REASON: To safeguard the archaeological interests of the site and enable adequate opportunities for archaeological investigations with regard to Policy 13 of the North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy (2008).

Protected Species 15. Prior to the commencement of any construction work or site clearance, further protected species surveys shall be undertaken (including surveys for bat roosts and activity surveys, otter, great crested newts and badger activity). The results of the surveys, together with appropriate mitigation strategies shall be submitted to and approved by the County Planning Authority in writing and thereafter implemented and maintained in accordance with the approved details.

REASON: To safeguard Protected Species with regard to Policy 13 of the North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy (2008).

Drainage 16. Prior to the commencement of the construction works, a detailed Flood Risk Assessment/surface water drainage scheme incorporating the design, provision, implementation and maintenance of the proposed Sustainable Drainage System shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by the County planning Authority in consultation with the Environment Agency.

REASON: To reduce the risk of flooding with regard to Policy 13 of the North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy (2008).

17. The approved scheme for flood risk protection shall be implemented fully in accordance with the requirements of the approved flood risk assessment and with the approved implementation programme.

- 77 -

REASON: To reduce the risk of flooding with regard to Policy 13 of the North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy (2008).

Public Rights of Way 18. Details of the design, construction and materials of all public rights of way overbridges and underpasses for the bypass shall be submitted to the County Planning Authority for approval in writing prior the their construction. The approved details shall then be implemented.

REASON: In the interest of vehicular and pedestrian safety and visual amenity with regard to Policy 13 of the North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy (2008).

Breeding Birds 19. Operations that involve the destruction and removal of vegetation shall not be undertaken during the months of March to August inclusive, unless approved in writing by the County Planning Authority, following submission of a specialist report and once it is satisfied that breeding birds will not be adversely affected.

REASON: To protect breeding birds with regard to Policy 13 of the North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy (2008).

Noise Mitigation 20. Prior to the commencement of construction works, a scheme for additional noise mitigation near to properties in Winston Close shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by the County Planning Authority. The approved scheme shall be implemented prior to the new road first coming into use.

REASON: In the interest of residential amenity with regard to Policy 13 of the North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy (2008).

REASONS FOR APPROVAL The proposal is for an extension of time limit for the implementation of planning permission KE/05/790 & WP/05/584, which was approved in May 2006, to enable sufficient time for the Highway Authority to secure funding. A 10 year period for implementation of the scheme has been proposed and Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 enables consideration of this longer period having regard to the provisions of the development plan and any other material considerations. The A509 between Kettering and Wellingborough, which includes the Isham Bypass, has been identified in Policy 2 of the North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy DPD as a strategic transport route which needs to be strengthened and enhanced in order for the future growth of North Northamptonshire. It is therefore considered that the need for the bypass is acceptable in principle and a longer period for implementation is in accordance with the North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy which looks forward to 2021.

Objections raised to the application by local residents relate particularly to the amenity impacts of the new road and that the extended 10 year period for implementation will blight the properties nearest to the proposed bypass route. The route of the bypass was determined after extensive public consultation and an appropriate process before it was chosen. This and the support in the Development Plan for this route is considered - 78 -

to outweigh the objections against the longer 10 year timescale for implementation. The potential local amenity impacts were considered in detail when planning permission KE/05/790 & WP/05/794 was determined, and the mitigation being proposed continues to outweigh the amenity and landscape impact of the proposed scheme and there are no further material planning considerations which have arisen which would justify refusal of the application. It is therefore considered that the proposal is considered acceptable having regard Policy 13 of the North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy DPD (June 2008).

- 79 -

BOROUGH COUNCIL OF WELLINGBOROUGH

FOR INFORMATION

Planning Committee 08/08/2012

Report of the Head of Planning and Local Development

APPLICATION REF: WP/2012/0270/C

PROPOSAL: Non-material amendment to planning permissions SN/2006/1670 and WP/2007/0039 to transport up to 1000 tonnes of sand and gravel by road using lorries over a period of 1-3 days.

LOCATION: Land west of Earls Barton Quarry, Grendon Road, Earls Barton, Northampton. NN6 0PE

APPLICANT: Hanson Quarry Products Europe Limited.

NOTE: Approved by Northamptonshire County Council on 13th July 2012 subject to the following condition/s:-

1. Except as otherwise required by the conditions on this non-material amendment permission, the temporary development hereby permitted shall be undertaken in accordance with the following documents:

• Application for Non Material Amendment dated 22 May 2012 and received on 23rd May 2012. • Drawing No. E77g/305 dated Mar 2012 and received on 23rd May 2012

2. Prior to transportation of mineral from the western extension to Earls Barton Plant Site a Traffic Management Plan shall be submitted for agreement in writing by the Minerals Planning Authority. The plan shall include proposals for: HGV traffic management arrangements; access construction details; and details of warning signs for 'HGV turning'. The plan as agreed in writing shall be implemented throughout the temporary mineral extraction operations.

3. Operations shall be controlled to ensure that mud is not deposited on the public highway and road cleaning plant shall be available throughout the operations to ensure the highway is maintained in a safe condition.

4. The temporary mineral extraction operations shall be restricted to a maximum total of 1,000 tonnes of sand and gravel to be transported to the Earls Barton Plant Site, and records shall be maintained at the weighbridge and written confirmation of the total amount extracted shall be submitted in writing to the Mineral Planning Authority within 14 days of the operation ceasing. Fairacre WP/2012/0270/C47.5m

Club

STATION ROAD

Drain Sports Ground

Tennis Court

Drain Drain _ _ _ _ Pond _ _

Drain

Towing Path FB 48.8m MoPs A Pump House River Nene Track Lock Drain

Drain A G

Weir G Works Sluice

47.5m Conveyors G

El Sub Sta

Pond Towing Path Track River Nene A River Nene

G STATION ROAD 47.5m Works G

Weir Drain Drain

Drain

Water ) )

The Stables 1.22m RH The Sidings Co Const, CP & ED Bdy

The Gatehouse

Drain

Eden House A

47.5m

Def

Co Const & Ward Bdy ) ) ) )

Drain Pond

47.9m _ ) )

Def

Co Const & Ward Bdy ) )

Drain

1.22m Tk H Def ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) 1.22m RH 1.22m RH ETL

G 1.22m RH 49.7m ) ) ) Def ) 50.0m

Def 1.22m RH 1.22m 47.2m ) ) FF Und Guide Post ) ETL ) Def ) ) )) A 1.22m Tk H ) The Station Lodge ) ) ) Porters Lodge ) ) ) )

Def ) )

1.22m RH 47.5m ) )

48.2m ) ) ) )

Def

Pond ) )

Planning & Local Development © Crown Copyright and database right 2012. Scale: Ordnance Survey 100018694. Legend This map is accurate 1:5,000 Cities Revealed to the scale specified Aerial Photography copyright: when reproduced at A4 WP/2012/0270/C - Land West of Earls Barton Quarry, Grendon Road, Earls Barton ± GetMapping PLC 1999 - 80 -

INFORMATIVE 1. This decision is permission for a Non Material Amendment to planning permission ref: SN/2006/1670 & WP/2007/0039, and all of the conditions imposed on this permission remain applicable.

- 81 -

8th August 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/2012/0060/F All Hallows Church PCC All Hallows (Church of AC England) Church, Church Street, Wellingborough. Erection of wrought steel gates on north porch entrance of All Hallows Church.

WP/2012/0176/F Mr Abid Bahrainwala 78 Station Road, Irchester. AC Single storey extension to rear of property for the benefit of a disabled person.

WP/2012/0192/F Mrs Pam Bennett Benthorne Lodge Rest Home, AC 48 Wellingborough Road, Finedon. Conservatory to front elevation.

WP/2012/0210/F Ms S Coomber 8 Hillside Close, Bozeat. AC Single storey side extension.

WP/2012/0218/F Mr T Holmes 21 London Road, Wollaston. AC Proposed part demolition/re- build and conversion of existing industrial premises to form 3 no. residential units - additional plan.

WP/2012/0219/F Mr D Baker 175 Midland Road, REFUSED Wellingborough. Rear extension and loft conversion involving extension to the roof.

WP/2012/0226/ELUD Mr Craig New Sports Club, 110 High Street, APPROVED Emotion Energy Irchester. (Bournemouth) Limited Installation of 10kw of PV panels to the roof to generate renewable energy.

WP/2012/0229/F Mr T Higgs 81 Main Road, Grendon. AC Erection of a double garage.

- 82 -

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

WP/2012/0231/AV Mrs H Hillman 4a The Square, Earls Barton. AC Painted signage on the front elevation of building at ground floor level (signage consists of three elements).

WP/2012/0232/F Mr Iain Welters 52 Gipsy Lane, Irchester. AC Conservatory to the rear elevation. Single garage to the side elevation.

WP/2012/0238/F Mr P Honeywood 12 14 Edmonds Close, AC Honeywood Limited Wellingborough. Extensions to existing commercial unit to provide ancillary storage.

WP/2012/0241/F Mr Matthew Davies 7 Milbury, Earls Barton. AC Internal alterations and front/side two storey extension to provide garage, utility, porch and master bedroom ensuite. Amended Plan.

WP/2012/0243/F Mr and Mrs Peter Mitchell Box Cottage, 3 Church Street, AC Isham. New kitchen, utility room, new french door to existing kitchen, modifications to existing garage/car parking, new roof to existing rear extension - amended plans.

WP/2012/0245/F St Barnabas Church of St Barnabas Church of AC England Infant School England Infant School, St Barnabas Street, Wellingborough. Single storey side extension to form new offices.

- 83 -

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

WP/2012/0246/F Mr Chris Bean 29 31 33 35 31A 35A AC Green Bean Development Co 37A 29A High Street, Limited Finedon. Minor amendments to planning approval WP/2010/0381/F to include altered form of proposed extensions to the rear of plots 1, 2, 3 and 4. Amendments to appearance of front door to plots 3 and 4 to allow for existing floor levels and their relationship to the existing footpath. Amendment to parking arrangement to include 2 no. additional single storey garage units. Amendments to internal layouts to plots 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8.

WP/2012/0247/LB Mr Chris Bean 29 31 33 35 31A 35A AC Green Bean Development Co 37A 29A High Street, Limited Finedon. Minor amendments to Listed Building Consent WP/2010/0382/LB to include altered form of proposed extensions to the rear of plots 1, 2, 3 and 4. Amendments to appearance of front door to plots 3 and 4 to allow for existing floor levels and their relationship to the existing footpath. Amendment to parking arrangement to include 2 no. additional single storey garage units. Amendments to internal layouts to plots 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8.

WP/2012/0248/F Mr Brian Saunders 18 Church View, Ecton. AC To construct a conservatory to the front elevation of the property.

- 84 -

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

WP/2012/0252/F Mr Mark Flack 1 Knights Close, Earls Barton. APPROVED Construction of timber garage on reinforced concrete slab to front garden of house. Existing tarmac drive regraded as required.

WP/2012/0254/NMA Mr Colin Stanley Proposed new house, APPROVED C/o Home Revolution Craves Lane, Main Street, Little Harrowden. Non-material amendment to planning approval WP/2012/0058/F - realignment of access to dwelling.

WP/2012/0256/F Mr Thore Larsson Plot U adjoining Rutherford APPROVED Volvo Group UK Limited Drive, Wellingborough. Minor amendments to planning approval WP/2011/0583/FM - elevational changes resulting from first floor parts being taken over ground floor warranty store and increase in workshop length by 1m. Other internal area relocations etc.

WP/2012/0257/F Ms Becky Haines 21 Church Street, Finedon. AC Two storey side extension.

WP/2012/0260/F Ms Elena Hunt 15 Margaret Avenue, AC Wellingborough. Two storey extension to side of dwelling incorporating a rear roof dormer extension; erection of a garden room.

WP/2012/0262/F Mr Eamonn Heffernan 28 Dene Close, AC Wellingborough. Single storey, pitched roof, front extension.

WP/2012/0265/F Mr J Alker 129 Main Street, AC Little Harrowden. First floor rear extension.

- 85 -

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

WP/2012/0266/F Mr Chris Short Apex Point, APPROVED Mahle Powertrain Limited 6 8 Paterson Road, Wellingborough. Proposed compressor housing, oil storage tanks and personnel door - changes to the proposal.

WP/2012/0268/F Shashikant Patel 118 Eastfield Road, AC Wellingborough. Vehicular access involving a dropped kerb on Eastfield Road frontage.

WP/2012/0271/NMA Ms Juliet Jarvis 40a Main Road, Grendon. AC To replace the approved flat roof porch with a new pitched roof porch. The proposed porch is to be constructed from stone to match the existing, with the existing front door relocated to the new porch with a pantile roof to match the existing barn. (Application for a non material amendment to planning approval WP/2011/0478/F).

WP/2012/0272/NMA Ms Juliet Jarvis 40a Main Road, Grendon. AC To replace the approved flat roof porch with a new pitched roof porch. The proposed porch is to be constructed from stone to match the existing, with the existing front door relocated to the new porch. The proposed pitched roof is to match the roof of the house. (Application for a non- material amendment to Listed Building Consent WP/2011/0479/LB).

WP/2012/0273/F Mrs Pat Curtis 7 Ewenfield Road, Finedon. AC Dormer roof extension - bathroom to first floor.

- 86 -

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

WP/2012/0276/F Mr David Farmiloe 3a South Street, Isham. APPROVED The application is for a change to aspects of the rear extension of previous approved application WP/2006/0170.

WP/2012/0280/F Mr and Mrs Jacobs 13 First Avenue, AC Wellingborough. Erect a white upvc conservatory in the rear garden.

WP/2012/0281/F Mr Paul Hobden 16 Goodens Lane, AC Great Doddington. Erection of a rear two storey extension and roof conversion involving dormer windows to create first floor accommodation. Erection of a detached garage

WP/2012/0282/NMA Mr Peter Cunningham 29 High Street, APPROVED Great Doddington. Non material amendment to planning approval WP/2011/0369/F - front windows - the lower window of the two 'slot' windows either side of the front entrance to the north west elevation is too low to facilitate the kitchen layout and has therefore been omitted. Also the window to the kitchen has been omitted completely.

WP/2012/0288/F Miss Caroline Mulcahy 13 Saxon Rise, Earls Barton. AC First floor extension above existing garage.

WP/2012/0289/F Mr Gary Shellhard 9 The Pyghtle, Earls Barton. APPROVED Single storey rear extension.

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. - 87 -

PLANNING COMMITTEE - BUILDING REGULATION DECISIONS ISSUED APPLICATIONS DEALT WITH

APPLICATION DECISIONS BOROUGH OF WELLINGBOROUGH Date: 18/07/2012

Application No. Name & Address Description

FP/2009/0477/ R Riley Residential development – 2 no. A 179 Main Road dwellings. APPROVED C Wilby Northants

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

PS/2012/0897/ Leicester City Council Proposed residential development New Walk Centre consisting of two new semi APPROVED C Welford Place detached town houses.

FP/2012/1386/ Seckloe Developments Proposed new dwelling. Chater Street APPROVED C Moulton

PS/2012/1473/ South Northamptonshire and Re-roofing and structural repairs Cherwell Building Control with internal ceiling replacement APPROVED Towcester and decorations. Replacement of most windows and doors and an additional extension using a traditional block and brick construction with a flat roof to tie into the levels of the adjacent building. The extension allows for a new classroom and two WC's. - 88 -

Application No. Name & Address Description

PS/2012/1526/ Building Control Internal alterations to the existing Guildhall 2 property and the creation of an APPROVED C Kingston Upon Thames extension to the rear of the property.

FP/2012/1602/ Mr Neil Jennings Conversion of the existing building Fir Tree Grove to a single family dwellinghouse APPROVED C Bozeat involving internal and external alterations.

FP/2012/1627/ Mrs A Weaver-Pope Extensions. King Street APPROVED Earls Barton Wellingborough

FP/2012/1628/ Mr T Higgs Garage. Main Road APPROVED Grendon Wellingborough

FP/2012/1697/ Mr Nick Shelton Internal alterations to create new Booth Drive office and archive space and APPROVED C Wellingborough creation of new access points linking units 12 and 14.

PS/2012/1698/ Gloucester City Council New external lift. Herbert Warehouse APPROVED The Docks - 89 -

Application No. Name & Address Description

PS/2012/1699/ East Northamptonshire Council Internal alterations, garage and loft Cedar Drive conversion of existing property and APPROVED C Thrapston the creation of a new extension to the rear of the property.

FP/2012/1700/ Mr D Patel Ground floor change of use from 2 Jersey Close commercial to residential. APPROVED Wellingborough Conversion into 4 self contained Northants apartments (2 on each floor).

FP/2012/1703/ Wollaston School Installation of double doors in old Irchester Road tank room. REJECTED Wollaston

FP/2012/1854/ Mr K Ahmed Ground floor rear extension. Park Road APPROVED Wellingborough

FP/2012/1866/ Parochial Church Council Extension and internal alterations. Church Lane APPROVED Wilby Wellingborough

FP/2012/1867/ Mrs Frances Ryan Two storey front extension. Brampton Close APPROVED C Wellingborough - 90 -

Application No. Name & Address Description

FP/2012/1871/ Ms Juliet Jarvis Erection of a new home office in the Main Road grounds of 40a Main Road APPROVED C Grendon Grendon. Wellingborough

DI/2012/1872/ Mr Uddin Conversion of existing garage area Irthlingborough Road into a shower room. ACCEPTED Wellingborough

BN/2012/1873/ Mr Kevin Gannor Alterations to kitchen area. Spinney Lane ACCEPTED Wilby

BN/2012/1874/ Mr and Mrs Stevens Removal of pillar in centre of Second Avenue kitchen and supporting corner of ACCEPTED Wellingborough the original house with steel RSJs. Fitting four roof lights to rear extension plus one in the loft at rear of the property.

FP/2012/1876/ Mr Neil McDonald Two storey extension and Main Road conservatory. APPROVED C Grendon

DI/2012/1932/ Mr G Stevens Conversion of bathroom to shower Shelley Road room. ACCEPTED Wellingborough - 91 -

Application No. Name & Address Description

DI/2012/1942/ Owner/Occupier Disabled bathroom adaptation. 58 Milner Road ACCEPTED Finedon

DI/2012/1943/ Owner/Occupier Disabled bathroom adaptation. 67 Abbey Road ACCEPTED Wellingborough

BN/2012/1944/ Mr and Mrs Plowe Removal of an internal wall. 4 Lowick Close ACCEPTED Wellingborough Northants

BN/2012/1945/ Wellingborough Homes Re-roofing and upgrade of 9f Silver Street insulation. ACCEPTED Wellingborough

BN/2012/1946/ Wellingborough Homes Re-roofing and upgrade of 9f Silver Street insulation. ACCEPTED Wellingborough

BN/2012/1947/ Wellingborough Homes Re-roofing and upgrade of 9f Silver Street insulation. ACCEPTED Wellingborough - 92 -

Application No. Name & Address Description

BN/2012/1948/ Wellingborough Homes Re-roofing and upgrade of 9f Silver Street insulation. ACCEPTED Wellingborough

BN/2012/1949/ Wellingborough Homes Re-roofing and upgrade of 9f Silver Street insulation. ACCEPTED Wellingborough

BN/2012/1950/ Wellingborough Homes Re-roofing and upgrade of 9f Silver Street insulation. ACCEPTED Wellingborough

BN/2012/1951/ Wellingborough Homes Re-roofing and upgrade of 9f Silver Street insulation. ACCEPTED Wellingborough

BN/2012/1952/ Wellingborough Homes Re-roofing and upgrade of 9f Silver Street insulation. ACCEPTED Wellingborough

BN/2012/1953/ Wellingborough Homes Re-roofing and upgrade of 9f Silver Street insulation. ACCEPTED Wellingborough - 93 -

Application No. Name & Address Description

BN/2012/1954/ Wellingborough Homes Re-roofing and upgrade of 9f Silver Street insulation. ACCEPTED Wellingborough

BN/2012/1955/ Wellingborough Homes Re-roofing and upgrade of 9f Silver Street insulation. ACCEPTED Wellingborough

BN/2012/1956/ Wellingborough Homes Re-roofing and upgrade of 9f Silver Street insulation. ACCEPTED Wellingborough

BN/2012/1957/ Wellingborough Homes Re-roofing and upgrade of 9f Silver Street insulation. ACCEPTED Wellingborough

BN/2012/1958/ Wellingborough Homes Re-roofing and upgrade of 9f Silver Street insulation. ACCEPTED Wellingborough

BN/2012/1959/ Wellingborough Homes Re-roofing and upgrade of 9f Silver Street insulation. ACCEPTED Wellingborough - 94 -

Application No. Name & Address Description

BN/2012/1960/ Wellingborough Homes Re-roofing and upgrade of 9f Silver Street insulation. ACCEPTED Wellingborough

BN/2012/1961/ Wellingborough Homes Re-roofing and upgrade of 9f Silver Street insulation. ACCEPTED Wellingborough

BN/2012/1962/ Wellingborough Homes Re-roofing and upgrade of 9f Silver Street insulation. ACCEPTED Wellingborough

BN/2012/1963/ Wellingborough Homes Re-roofing and upgrade of 9f Silver Street insulation. ACCEPTED Wellingborough

BN/2012/1964/ Wellingborough Homes Re-roofing and upgrade of 9f Silver Street insulation. ACCEPTED Wellingborough

BN/2012/1965/ Wellingborough Homes Re-roofing and upgrade of 9f Silver Street insulation. ACCEPTED Wellingborough - 95 -

Application No. Name & Address Description

BN/2012/1966/ Wellingborough Homes Re-roofing and upgrade of 9f Silver Street insulation. ACCEPTED Wellingborough

BN/2012/1967/ Wellingborough Homes Re-roofing and upgrade of 9f Silver Street insulation. ACCEPTED Wellingborough

BN/2012/1968/ Wellingborough Homes Re-roofing and upgrade of 9f Silver Street insulation. ACCEPTED Wellingborough

BN/2012/1969/ Wellingborough Homes Re-roofing and upgrade of 9f Silver Street insulation. ACCEPTED Wellingborough

BN/2012/1970/ Wellingborough Homes Re-roofing and upgrade of 9f Silver Street insulation. ACCEPTED Wellingborough

BN/2012/1971/ Wellingborough Homes Re-roofing and upgrade of 9f Silver Street insulation. ACCEPTED Wellingborough - 96 -

Application No. Name & Address Description

BN/2012/1972/ Wellingborough Homes Re-roofing and upgrade of 9f Silver Street insulation. ACCEPTED Wellingborough

BN/2012/1973/ Wellingborough Homes Re-roofing and upgrade of 9f Silver Street insulation. ACCEPTED Wellingborough

BN/2012/1974/ Wellingborough Homes Re-roofing and upgrade of 9f Silver Street insulation. ACCEPTED Wellingborough

BN/2012/1975/ Wellingborough Homes Re-roofing and upgrade of 9f Silver Street insulation. ACCEPTED Wellingborough

BN/2012/1976/ Wellingborough Homes Re-roofing and upgrade of 9f Silver Street insulation. ACCEPTED Wellingborough

BN/2012/1977/ Wellingborough Homes Re-roofing and upgrade of 9f Silver Street insulation. ACCEPTED Wellingborough - 97 -

Application No. Name & Address Description

BN/2012/1978/ Wellingborough Homes Re-roofing and upgrade of 9f Silver Street insulation. ACCEPTED Wellingborough

BN/2012/1985/ Mr Allan Thorneycroft Knock wall through from kitchen to Westlea Road dining room. ACCEPTED Sywell Wellingborough

FP/2012/1989/ Mr and Mrs Pearse Front porch and WC. Tudor Way APPROVED Wellingborough

DI/2012/2068/ Mr B Bhojani Alterations to hallway for formation Fernie Way of toilet facilities. ACCEPTED Wellingborough

BN/2012/2070/ Ms Harris Remove load bearing wall, insert Mosel Close steal beam support and make good. ACCEPTED Wellingborough

FP/2012/2074/ Tresham Institute of Further and Removal of passage wall - partition. Higher Education Upgrade fire route first floor APPROVED Church Street escape. Wellingborough - 98 -

Application No. Name & Address Description

BN/2012/2075/ Miss Sarah Gee Single storey extension. Millers Park ACCEPTED Wellingborough

DI/2012/2094/ Mrs S Lewis LA bathroom adaptation grant Ewenfield Road aided. ACCEPTED Finedon Wellingborough

BN/2012/2095/ Mr and Mrs Austin Lintels to form new window opening Whytewell Road to rear ground floor property and ACCEPTED Wellingborough existing window changed to doors.

BN/2012/2097/ Mr Philip Clark Removal of a non structural wall Spring Gardens between existing kitchen and dining ACCEPTED Earls Barton room supporting existing joists to Wellingborough first floor. Installation of a RSJ to building inspectors specification to support existing load following removal of wall. BN/2012/2109/ Mr Clarke Replacement roof after fire Coniston Close damage. ACCEPTED Wellingborough

BN/2012/2112/ Miss Michelle Brindle Thermal upgrade. Valley Road ACCEPTED Wellingborough - 99 -

Application No. Name & Address Description

BN/2012/2154/ Mr Daniel Lynch Removal of wall in kitchen. Insert Finedon Road steel beam to support wall. New ACCEPTED Wellingborough door. Two new windows, one of which to be formed internally.

BN/2012/2157/ Mr Paul Partridge To turn a two bed house into a Weavers Road three bed house. ACCEPTED Wellingborough

FP/2012/2158/ Mr Peter Hazelwood Internal alterations, internal Roman Way bathroom alterations and provision APPROVED Higham Ferrers of a new boiler and multi-fuel stove.

DI/2012/2160/ Mr Yeend Structural work. Door widening. Roberts Street ACCEPTED Wellingborough

BN/2012/2228/ Mr Alan Gibson Garage conversion. London Road ACCEPTED Wollaston Wellingborough

DI/2012/2230/ Mr Lake Disabled adaptation (WETROOM). 31 Duncan Court ACCEPTED Wellingborough Northants - 100 -

Application No. Name & Address Description

BN/2012/2232/ Mr Scott Frater To construct an additional block Weavers Road entrance/exit by removing existing ACCEPTED Wellingborough windows and panel in-fills and replace with a double door. Existing path level modified to allow wheelchair access.

BN/2012/2262/ Mr Trevor Farden To extend kitchen and build utility Lea Way room to rear of garage. ACCEPTED Wellingborough

DI/2012/2263/ Mrs Vijyaben Mistry Level access shower room. Mill Road ACCEPTED Wellingborough

BN/2012/2306/ Mr Mathew Graham Moving kitchen and upgrade of Bull Close insulation. ACCEPTED Bozeat Wellingborough

DI/2012/2327/ Mr Drage Conversion of bathroom into a Edinburgh Road shower room. ACCEPTED Wellingborough - 101 -

Received Appeals

Appeal Site Ref. No. Date Status Received

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

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

Land rear of 113 WP/2011/0459/F 20/04/2012 Statement of Case Doddington Road Sent – Awaiting Site Earls Barton Visit