AGENDA

Virtual Planning Committee

Wednesday 3 February 2021 at 7pm

Please note that this meeting will be held remotely. The agenda will be circulated to members of the council in the normal way.

A live stream will be available for members of the public and press, the link to this will be placed on the council website www.wellingborough.gov.uk on the day of the meeting.

1. Apologies for absence.  2. Declarations of interest (to be verbalised).

 3. Confirmation of the minutes of the meeting held on 6 January 2021.  4. Applications for planning permission, listed building consent, building regulation approval and appeal information.*

  5. Planning Appeal Decision Letters:  (a) Garages rear of 3 – 19 Union Street, Finedon; (b) 47 Parkins Close, Wellingborough. 6. Any other item that the chairman decides is urgent.   The reports on this agenda include summaries of representations that have been received in response to consultation under the Planning Acts and in accordance with the provisions in the Town and Country Planning (Development Management Procedure) Order 2015. Full transcripts and copies of the disclosable representations can be obtained at www.wellingborough.gov.uk/viewplanningapplications

Shaun Darcy Executive Director/Head of Paid Service

Date issued: 26 January 2021  Enclosed

Swanspool House, Doddington Road, Wellingborough, Northamptonshire NN8 1BP Tel: 01933 229 777 www.wellingborough.gov.uk

Further information: If you have any questions regarding this agenda, please contact Fiona Hubbard, Democratic Services Officer, on 01933 231 519 or [email protected]

Requests to address the virtual planning committee meeting:

Please note this will be a virtual meeting taking into account the regulations contained in the Local Authorities (Coronavirus) (Flexibility of Local Authority Meetings) (England) Regulations 2020, which came into force on 4 April 2020. This applies to all meetings held before 7 May 2021.

If you wish to speak at this virtual planning committee, you may only do so in relation to an item on the agenda, you must register your request by 5pm on the day before the virtual meeting and you have 3 minutes to speak.

If you register to speak, you will address the planning committee via the telephone. You will need to dial in just before the meeting starts and remain on the line until your planning application is heard. A telephone number will be provided to you by democratic services to enable you to dial in. When you register to speak, you will need to provide democratic services with the telephone number that you will be dialling in from, to enable them to recognise the number and permit you into the meeting.

We will also ask that you provide us with a copy of what you wish to say, again by 5pm on the day before the virtual meeting. If there are any IT issues on the night and you are unable to virtually attend the meeting, the chairman will read what you wish to say.

If you are addressing the virtual planning committee as a representative for a planning application, we allow one of each of the following to address the committee – one agent, one only of each specialist consultant deemed necessary and the applicant.

To register to speak and submit your written submission, please email: [email protected]

Please note the council is using the Microsoft Teams platform to deliver this meeting. Once you are registered to speak you will be provided with details of how you can participate in the meeting.

Membership of the committee:

Councillor Bell (Chairman), Councillor Morrall (Vice Chairman), Councillors Aslam, Graves, Griffiths, G Lawman, Maguire, Scarborough, Skittrall, Stevenson and Ward (11).

Agenda item 4

Borough Council of Wellingborough Planning Committee Wednesday 3 February 2021 at 7.00 pm Council Chamber, Swanspool House

INDEX Application Location Page No.

WP/20/00372/FPD Street Record Footpath UM9 from Irthlingborough Road to junction with UM8 and UM10 Wellingborough 2

WP/20/00732/REM Land Area 36 Primary School Stanton Cross Irthlingborough Road North Wellingborough 8

WP/20/00793/REM Site R10A Residential W North Niort Way Wellingborough 38

WP/20/00648/FUL Dungee Corner Harrold Road Bozeat 88

WP/20/00744/FUL Tulip Lodge 85 Harrowden Road Wellingborough 114

Planning Committee 1 of 131 3 February 2021

BOROUGH COUNCIL OF WELLINGBOROUGH AGENDA ITEM 2 PLANNING COMMITTEE 3 February 2021 DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST UNDER THE CODE OF CONDUCT

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

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

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

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

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

DPI   Other  Registerable  DPI  Other  Registerable  DPI  Other

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

Declaration of interests: page 1 of 4 Extract (modified) from the Code of Conduct 2012 Part 2 – Interests

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

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

6 Other Interests 6.1 In addition to the requirements of Paragraph 5, where you have an interest described in paragraph 6.3 below in any business of the authority, and 6.1.1 where you are aware or ought reasonably to be aware of the existence of that interest, and 6.1.2 you attend a meeting of the authority at which the business is considered, you are expected to disclose to that meeting the existence and nature of that interest at the commencement of that consideration, or when the interest becomes apparent. 6.2 Where your interest is a “sensitive interest” for the purposes of this Code, you need not disclose the details of the sensitive interest to the meeting, but merely the fact that you have an interest in the matter concerned. 6.3 You have an interest for the purposes of paragraph 6.1 of this Code where: 6.3.1 a decision in relation to that matter might reasonably be regarded as affecting the well-being or financial standing of you or a member of your family or a person or body with whom you have a close association to a greater extent than it would affect the majority of the Council Tax payers, ratepayers or inhabitants of the ward or electoral area for which you have been elected or otherwise of the authority’s administrative area, or

1 A registerable interest that satisfies the tests in paragraphs 5.3.2 (a) and (b) shall be known as a prejudicial interest for the purpose of declarations of interest at a meeting.

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

------

Appendix A

Disclosable Pecuniary Interests The duties to register, disclose and not to participate in respect of any matter in which a member has a Disclosable Pecuniary Interest (DPI) are set out in Chapter 7 of the Localism Act 2011. Breaches of the rules relating to DPIs may lead to criminal sanctions being imposed. Chapter 7 of the Localism Act 2011 provides that a pecuniary interest is a “disclosable pecuniary interest” in relation to a member (M), if it is of a description specified in regulations made by the Secretary of State and either: (a) it is an interest of M’s, or (b) it is an interest of: (i) M’s spouse or civil partner, (ii) a person with whom M is living as husband and wife, or (iii) a person with whom M is living as if they were civil partners, and M is aware that that other person has the interest. DPIs are defined in The Relevant Authorities (Disclosable Pecuniary Interests) Regulations 2012 (SI No. 1464) as follows: Interest Prescribed description Employment, office, trade, Any employment, office, trade, profession or vocation carried on for profit or gain. profession or vocation Sponsorship Any payment or provision of any other financial benefit (other than from the relevant authority) made or provided within the relevant period in respect of any expenses incurred by M in carrying out duties as a member, or towards the election expenses of M. This includes any payment or financial benefit from a trade union within the meaning of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992). Contracts Any contract which is made between the relevant person (or a body in which the relevant person has a beneficial interest) and the relevant authority— (a) under which goods or services are to be provided or works are to be executed; and (b) which has not been fully discharged. Land Any beneficial interest in land which is within the area of the relevant authority. Licences Any licence (alone or jointly with others) to occupy land in the area of the relevant authority for a month or longer. Corporate tenancies Any tenancy where (to M’s knowledge)— (a) the landlord is the relevant authority; and (b) the tenant is a body in which the relevant person has a beneficial interest. Securities Any beneficial interest in securities of a body where— (a) that body (to M’s knowledge) has a place of business or land in the area of the relevant authority; and (b) either— (i) the total nominal value of the securities exceeds £25,000 or one hundredth of the total issued share capital of that body; or (ii) if the share capital of that body is of more than one class, the total nominal value of the shares of any one class in which the relevant person has a beneficial interest exceeds one hundredth of the total issued share capital of that class. For this purpose: “the Act” means the Localism Act 2011; “body in which the relevant person has a beneficial interest” means a firm in which the relevant person is a partner or a body corporate of which the relevant person is a director, or in the securities of which the relevant person has a beneficial interest; “director” includes a member of the committee of management of an industrial and provident society; “land” excludes an easement, servitude, interest or right in or over land which does not carry with it a right for the relevant person (alone or jointly with another) to occupy the land or to receive income; “M” means a member of a relevant authority; “member” includes a co-opted member; “relevant authority” means the authority of which M is a member; “relevant period” means the period of 12 months ending with the day on which M gives a notification for the purposes of section 30(1) or 31(7), as the case may be, of the Act; “relevant person” means M or M’s spouse or civil partner, a person with whom M is living as husband and wife, or a person with whom M is living as if they were civil partners; “securities” means shares, debentures, debenture stock, loan stock, bonds, units of a collective investment scheme within the meaning of the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 and other securities of any description, other than money deposited with a building society.

3 An other interest that satisfies the tests in paragraphs 6.4.1 to 6.4.3 shall also be known as a prejudicial interest for the purpose of declarations of interest at a meeting. 4 These rules are to the effect that if the matter is one on which an ordinary member of the public would be allowed to address the meeting you are provided with the same opportunity. If an ordinary member of the public is not allowed to speak on the matter, you cannot do so. Declaration of interests: page 3 of 4 DECLARING INTERESTS FLOWCHART – QUESTIONS TO ASK YOURSELF

What matters are being discussed at the meeting?

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

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

Does the matter:

You should not  affect my financial position or the financial position of a person or body participate in the through whom the interest arises; or meeting and vote, unless you have a  relate to the determining of any approval, dispensation. consent, licence, permission or registration in relation to me or any Also, withdraw from the person through whom the interest arises, meeting by leaving the YES room. AND NO Is the interest one which a member of the In the interests of public with knowledge of the relevant facts transparency tell the would reasonably regard as so significant Chairman your reason that it is likely to prejudice my judgment of for withdrawing the public interest?

Declaration of interests: page 4 of 4

BOROUGH COUNCIL OF WELLINGBOROUGH

Planning Committee 3 February 2021

Report of the Principal Planning Manager

Extension of time (if applicable): 31 July 2021

Case Officer Mrs Louise Jelley WP/20/00372/FPD

Date received Date valid Overall Expiry Ward 26 June 2020 12 October 2020 7 December 2020 Swanspool

Applicant Clive Bell

Location Street Record Footpath UM9 from Irthlingborough Road to junction with UM8 and UM10 Wellingborough Northamptonshire

Proposal Application for footpath UM9 (from Irthlingborough Road to the junction with footpaths UM8 and UM10) right of way extinguishment and diversion to route 10 part 1

PLANNING HISTORY WP/16/00189/LN Approved 26.04.2016 Remove 2 x UHF 3G Dual Polar Panel Antenna, remove 1 x SHF 0.6m standard dish, install 6 x UHF Triband dual polar panel antenna, install 1 x SHF 0.6m HP dish, remove 1 x 3101 cabinet, Install 2 x NSN FPF RACKS AND 1 X ELTEK O/D (EXTEND CONCRETE PLINTH TO SUIT) WP/16/00559/LN 12.09.2016 Mini cabinet -EMWELLI44 WP/20/00372/FPD Determination pending. Application for footpath UM9 (from Irthlingborough Road to the junction with footpaths UM8 and UM10) right of way extinguishment and diversion to route 10 part 1 WP/20/00458/REM Approved with conditions 23.09.2020 Construction of road (route) known as Irthlingborough Road (Parts 5 and 6) along with drainage and all ancillary details + discharge of conditions 47 and 48 (drainage conditions) pursuant to planning permission ref: WP/15/00605/VAR WU/1952/0030 Approved with conditions 21.05.1952 Low tension overhead electricity line

Planning Committee 2 of 131 3 February 2021

WP/20/00372/FPD Slurry Pit

2 1

Waverly Cottages

65.6m E

D OA R GH OU OR GB IN HL IRT

ICT Services © Crown Copyright and database right 2021. Scale: Ordnance Survey 100018694. Legend This map is accurate 1:1,250 Cities Revealed to the scale specified Aerial Photography copyright: WP/20/00372/FPD Footpath UM9 from Irthlingborough Rd when reproduced at A4 ± GetMapping PLC 1999 to junction with UM8 and UM10 Wellingborough

Reason(s) for committee consideration:

- The proposal relates to Stanton Cross

THE SITE AND SURROUNDINGS The footpath to which this application relates lies in open countryside to the east of Wellingborough and east of the railway line. The footpath is located to the north side of Irthlingborough Road and the route to be diverted is from the southern boundary of South Hill Farm to the northern boundary of Irthlingborough Road.

APPLICATION PROPOSAL AND BACKGROUND This is an application to make an order under Section 257 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 for the diversion of a public footpath UM9 from Irthlingborough Road, to the Junction with UM8 and UM10, Wellingborough, Northamptonshire,

The proposed diversion forms part of the approved Stanton Cross development.

The proposed diversion is necessary as a result of the proposed development and siting of the first Primary School at Stanton Cross and an area of residential development known as Parcel 13. The application seeks to provide a new diverted route for the footpath which will be located to the east of the existing footpath route along part of a newly approved road for Stanton Cross known as 'Route 10'.

The Stanton Cross development was originally granted outline planning permission in 2008 for mixed use development including the construction of 3,200 new homes, approximately 50ha of strategic B1, B2 and B8 employment areas, and associated infrastructure provision including transport, community and recreational development as part of a comprehensive and integrated sustainable urban extension to the east of Wellingborough (WP/2004/0600).

A further application for a variation of conditions was approved in 2017 which amended the master plan (WP/15/00605/VAR) and included the approved scheme of an additional 550 houses.

The local planning authority has the power under Section 257 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 to make the footpath diversion order if it is satisfied that the order is necessary to enable the development to be carried out.

NATIONAL GUIDANCE, DEVELOPMENT PLAN POLICY AND SUPPLEMENTARY PLANNING DOCUMENTS/GUIDANCE: National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) Planning Practice Guidance (PPG)

North Northamptonshire Joint Core Strategy (JCS) Policies: 1 (presumption in favour of sustainable development) 3 (landscape character) 4 (biodiversity and geodiversity) 5 (water environment, resources and flood risk management) 7 (community services and facilities)

Planning Committee 3 of 131 3 February 2021

8 (North Northamptonshire place shaping principles) 10 (provision of infrastructure) 11 (network of urban and rural areas) 15 (well connected towns, villages and neighbourhoods) 16 (connecting the network of settlements) 20 (Nene and Ise valleys) 22 (delivering economic prosperity)

Plan for the Borough of Wellingborough - (PBW) Policies GI 4 (enhancement and provision of open space, sports and recreational facilities) Site 1 (Wellingborough east)

Supplementary Planning Documents/Guidance: Sustainable Design Biodiversity Upper Nene Valley Special Protection Area Trees on Development Sites Planning Out Crime in Northamptonshire

SUMMARY OF REPLIES TO CONSULTATIONS/REPRESENTATIONS RECEIVED 1. Northamptonshire Highways - subject to compliance with the following requirements of the local highway authority no objection is raised to the application on highway safety or capacity grounds.

Please ensure that the applicant is made fully aware of their responsibilities in respect of Public Footpath UM9 which crosses the proposed development site as follows:

- With respect to construction works to be carried out in close proximity to and using Public Rights of Way as access, please note the following standard requirements: - 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 Section 137 HA 1980. - There must be no interference or damage to the surface of the right of way as a result of the construction. - 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 the Area Rights of Way Officer, (as per Section 131 HA1980). - If as a result of the development, ie the safety of the public cannot be guaranteed, the Right of Way needs to be closed, and a Temporary Traffic Regulation Order would become necessary. 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 period is required. Please contact the highway authority at:- [email protected] - Any new path furniture such as a gate can only be authorised if needed for the ingress or egress of livestock (Section 147 Highways Act 1980) and needs to be approved in advance with the Area Rights of Way Officer, standard examples can be provided. - Please do not rely on the position of features on site for an accurate position of the public rights of way. This must be taken only from the Current Definitive Map and Statement. Diversion Orders; [email protected]

Planning Committee 4 of 131 3 February 2021

1. No works affecting any existing public right of way may commence without the express written permission of the local highway authority's Rights of Way or Definitive Map Teams. 2. The developer is reminded to apply to the local planning authority for any proposed permanent diversion of a right of way under Section 257 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 required to facilitate the development. The alternative route for such a diversion must be agreed with the local highway authority's Area Rights of Way Officer and be available for public use prior to the closure of any existing route. Northamptonshire County Council is available and preferably required for the involvement, guidance and consultation at all stages of the diversion orders as necessary.

This response is without prejudice to any Public Right of Way which may exist across the site but whose presence is not recorded on the County Council's Definitive Map and Statement (2016). Note Section 257 of TCPA 1990 only applies to PROW as follows; FP's BW's and Restricted Byways. LPA's cannot divert or stop up BOATS; this can only be done at a magistrate's court.

2. Ramblers Association - no comments to make.

3. Byways and Bridleways Trust - no response received.

4. NCC Rights of Way - no response received.

5. British Horse Society - no response received.

6. Anglian Water - no response received.

7. BT Group Plc - no response received.

8. Open Spaces Society - no response received.

10. Auto Cycle Union - no response received.

11. Western power distribution - no response received.

12. Neighbours - no objections received.

ASSESSMENT AND REASONED JUSTIFICATION Outline planning permission has been granted for the Stanton Cross SUE development and therefore the principle of development has been established and is satisfactory in planning terms; the main consideration for this application in this instance is whether the footpath diversion order is necessary to enable the development to be carried out in accordance with the planning permission.

In addition, the local planning authority is required to consider whether the disadvantages and losses, if any, flowing directly from the diversion order are so significant that the order should not to be made.

Planning Committee 5 of 131 3 February 2021

In making that assessment consideration should be given to any adverse effect of making the order on those who would be entitled to use the footpath.

The proposal raises the following main issues: A grant of planning permission does not permit a developer to obstruct a public right of way. This is a criminal offence, as well as causing a public nuisance. However, Section 257 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 gives a local planning authority the power to make an order authorising the stopping-up or diversion of footpaths, bridleways or restricted byways where it is satisfied that stopping-up or diversion is necessary to enable development to be carried out in accordance with the approved scheme.

As part of the Wellingborough East SUE which is a committed development and has been granted outline permission, the Primary School and residential development is required as part of the comprehensive development package to provide education for children and homes for the growing population and to meet the housing targets required for the Borough of Wellingborough as set out within the Joint Core Strategy.

CONCLUSION The proposed diversion of the Public Right of Way UM9 is necessary to enable the approved scheme to be implemented. No objections have been received and as such the local planning authority recommend to make the footpath diversion order in accordance with Section 257 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.

RECOMMENDATION (1) the application be granted and a Diversion Order made. (2) the Principal Planning Manager is authorised to give the requisite notices and to publicise the making of the Order. (3) if no objections are received or if received withdrawn the Principal Planning Manager to confirm the Order. (4) if objections are received and not withdrawn, subject to the applicant agreeing to pay the council's costs associated with a public inquiry and seeking confirmation of the Order by the Secretary of State, the Principal Planning Manager be authorised to take any action necessary for the Order to be confirmed by the Secretary of State.

CONDITIONS/REASONS

1. (1) the application be granted and a diversion Order is made. (2) the Principal Planning Manager is authorised to give the requisite notices and to publicise the making of the Order. (3) if no objections are received or if received withdrawn the Principal Planning Manager to confirm the Order. (4) if objections are received and not withdrawn, subject to the applicant agreeing to pay the council's costs associated with a public inquiry and seeking confirmation of the Order by the Secretary of State, the Principal Planning Manager be authorised to take any action necessary for the Order to be confirmed by the Secretary of State.

INFORMATIVE/S 1. The written permission of the Land Owner(s) affected by or abutting the existing and proposed routes must be obtained. All costs associated with such Orders fall to the developer of the site in question. In

Planning Committee 6 of 131 3 February 2021

addition, the Definitive Map and Statement must also be amended for which costs apply. The whole of the works must be carried out by and at the cost of the developer. The whole of the works must be carried out in accordance with the requirements and specification of the local highway authority. The existing route may not be affected in any way, obstructed or closed until the alternative route is completed in accordance with the planning permission and is available for use. If, in order to carry out construction works, it is necessary to temporarily close the right of way application must be made for 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 and contact the highway authority at [email protected] http://www3.northamptonshire.gov.uk/councilservices/northamptonshire- highways/rights-of-way/Pages/temporary-traffic-regulation-orders.aspx Please do not rely on the position of features on site for an accurate position of the public rights of way. This must be taken only from the Definitive Map and Statement 2016.

Planning Committee 7 of 131 3 February 2021

2.7 Flowchart showing procedure for S.257 applications

Application received by Application registered and initial check Planning Team carried out to ensure all the documentation is attached

28 day informal consultations carried out Application assigned to a case officer. A second check of the application is made. with consultees, and a site visit carried out

Review comments received

Objections No objections received. received Negotiations undertaken to see whether the objections can be overcome The SDNPA decide on whether to make an Order.

An Order is made by the SDNPA decides not to The Order process is make an Order. SDNPA. abandoned. There is no right of appeal.

Site notices are displayed on the site and publication of the notice in the press is carried out. Prescribed parties are notified.

Objections received. No objections

The Order can be confirmed.* Site Negotiations on Objections notices are displayed and publication is objections withdrawn carried out in the press. Prescribed parties are notified including the Ordnance Survey. Objections not *An Order cannot be confirmed until withdrawn Planning Permission has been granted.

If certification is required, the If certification is not diversion/stopping-up cannot take required, the The SDNPA refer the Order to effect until the SDNPA has certified diversion/stopping-up takes the Secretary of State for a that the required works have been effect following the Order decision. completed. Following certification a confirmation, notice will be placed in the 6local newspaper and the Ordnance Survey informed.

BOROUGH COUNCIL OF WELLINGBOROUGH

Planning Committee 3 February 2021

Report of the Principal Planning Manager

Extension of time (if applicable):

Case Officer Mr Duncan Law WP/20/00732/REM

Date received Date valid Overall Expiry Ward Parish 9 November 2020 9 November 2020 8 February 2021 Finedon Finedon

Applicant McAvoy Group Ltd

Agent Tom Lambshead

Location Land Area 36 Primary School Stanton Cross Irthlingborough Road North Wellingborough Northamptonshire

Proposal Primary school and children's centre, including vehicular parking, hard and soft landscaping, external amenity space and ancillary works pursuant to planning permission reference WP/15/00605/VAR. An environmental statement (August 2004/05) was submitted to and approved by Borough of Wellingborough Council under the original outline permission WP/2004/0600/O as the application constituted an environmental impact assessment application. An Environmental Statement Supplement was approved by Borough of Wellingborough Council under s.73 outline permission WP/15/00605/VAR

PLANNING HISTORY WP/15/00190/CND Fully discharged 06.02.2017 Details submitted pursuant to condition 55 (utilities strategy) of planning permission ref: WP/2004/0600 WP/15/00197/CND Part discharged 02.07.2015 Details submitted pursuant to condition 42 (part) (noise mitigation proposals) and 45 (noise from kennels) of planning permission ref: WP/2004/0600 WP/15/00605/VAR Approved with conditions 06.02.2017 Section 73 application for the variation/removal of conditions 5 (reserved matters link to masterplan), 7 (development in accordance with stated plans), 8 (development in accordance with ES), 9 (max development parameters), 10 (phasing), 15 (highways works and phasing), 16 (travel plan phasing), 25, 26, 28, 31, 32 and 34 (ecology mitigation), 27 (compensation areas), 35 (structure landscape strategy), 38 (landscape mitigation), 42

Planning Committee 8 of 131 3 February 2021

WP/20/00732/REM

2 1

Waverly Cottages

65.6m E

D OA R GH OU OR GB IN HL IRT

ICT Services © Crown Copyright and database right 2021. Scale: Ordnance Survey 100018694. Legend This map is accurate 1:1,250 Cities Revealed to the scale specified Aerial Photography copyright: WP/20/00732/REM Land Area 36 Primary School when reproduced at A4 ± GetMapping PLC 1999 Stanton Cross Irthlingborough Road North Wellingborough

and 44 (noise mitigation), 45 (kennels) and 49 (construction management plan) of planning permission ref: WP/2004/0600 - Mixed use development including 87ha of residential development; B1, B2 and B8 development, new public transport links (buses), new and enhanced walking and cycling routes and facilities, Country Park, Neighbourhood Centre, 2 Secondary local centres, construction of access roads, bridges and highway structures, footways, footpaths, bridleways; and associated works and facilities. AMENDED DOCUMENT WP/15/00680/CND Determination pending. Details submitted pursuant to conditions 14 (public footpath routes), 18 (flood water phasing plan, 19 (flood mitigation works) and 24 (soil reuse strategy) of planning permission ref: WP/2004/0600/OUT WP/19/00468/AMD Approved with conditions 06.09.2019 Non-material amendment to make an amendment to the time condition on the Section 73 Outline Planning Permission (ref: WP/15/00605/VAR) to reflect the terms of the original 2008 Outline Planning Permission (WP/2004/0600/O) to provide a programme for the submission and approval of the reserved matters for the remaining phases of the development within a 15 year limitation period and until January 2023. Condition 1 should state: "The development to which this permission relates shall be commenced within a period of 15 years from the date of the original outline planning permission (WP/2004/0600/O). The applications for approval of the reserved matters shall be made to the planning authority before the expiry of 6 years beginning with the date of this planning permission and development must be begun not later than the expiration of two years from the approval of the final reserved matters." WP/20/00032/CND Part discharged 28.04.2020 Details submitted pursuant to conditions 3 and 4 (Neighbourhood Centre and South Slopes Design Brief) (partial discharge) of planning permission ref: WP/15/00605/VAR relating to parcels 11, 12a, 12b, 13, 17a, 36 and 40. WP/20/00538/CND Part discharged 14.10.2020 Details submitted pursuant to conditions 25 (ecology), 26 (ecology) and 27 (habitats and access management plan) of planning permission ref: WP/15/00605/VAR WP/20/00539/CND Part discharged 14.10.2020 Details submitted pursuant to conditions 27 and 28 (ecology management plan) of outline planning permission ref: WP/2004/0600 WP/20/00541/CND Part discharged 01.10.2020

Planning Committee 9 of 131 3 February 2021

Part discharge of condition 40 (archaeology) of WP/2004/0600/O in relation to parcels 3, 9a, 9b, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17a, 20, 21a, 21b, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 33, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 45, 46, 51, 57, 60, 64, 65, 66, 68a, 68b, 69, 71, 72, and 79, as shown on Plan Ref. DE26U_001 RevA Plan 2 of 2. WP/20/00542/CND Part discharged 01.10.2020 Part discharge of condition 38 (archaeology) of WP/15/00605/VAR in relation to parcels 3, 9a, 9b, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17a, 20, 21a, 21b, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 33, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 45, 46, 51, 57, 60, 64, 65, 66, 68a, 68b, 69, 71, 72, and 79, as shown on Plan Ref. DE26U_001 RevA Plan 2 of 2. WP/20/00732/REM Determination pending. Primary school and children's centre, including vehicular parking, hard and soft landscaping, external amenity space and ancillary works pursuant to planning permission reference WP/15/00605/VAR. An environmental statement (August 2004/05) was submitted to and approved by Borough of Wellingborough Council under the original outline permission WP/2004/0600/O as the application constituted an environmental impact assessment application. An Environmental Statement Supplement was approved by Borough of Wellingborough Council under s.73 outline permission WP/15/00605/VAR WP/20/00733/CND Part discharged 21.12.2020 Details submitted pursuant to Condition 43 (lighting strategy) and Condition 46 (construction management) of planning permission ref: WP/15/00605/VAR BW/1984/0073 Deemed approved 05.04.1984 11 KV overhead electricity line WP/2008/0420 Application withdrawn/undetermined 28.01.2009 Variation of conditions 9, 35, 43 and 44, deletion of condition 45 of planning permission WP/2004/0600/O for the mixed use development including 87 ha of residential development; B1, B2 and B8 development, new public transport links (buses), new and enhanced walking and cycling routes and facilities, country park, neighbourhood centre, 2 secondary local centres, construction of access roads, bridges and highway structures, footways, footpaths, bridleways; and associated works and facilities WU/1952/0063 Deemed approved 26.10.1952 Over head line BW/1983/0495 Approved with conditions 27.07.1983 11KV overhead electricity line WP/2004/0600 Approved subject to S106 Legal Agreement 28.01.2008 Mixed use development including 87ha of residential development; B1, B2 and B8 development, new public transport

Planning Committee 10 of 131 3 February 2021

links (buses), new and enhanced walking and cycling routes and facilities, Country Park, Neighbourhood Centre, 2 Secondary local centres, construction of access roads, bridges and highway structures, footways, footpaths, bridleways; and associated works and facilities.

Reason for referral to committee

- The application has been referred to planning committee as it is a on a site exceeding one hectare in area and the proposal relates to Stanton Cross

THE SITE AND SURROUNDINGS The 2.056ha application site known as Parcel 36, is two sections of arable fields separated by a field margin of semi-improved grassland, hedgerow and farm track located to the north of the widened Irthlingborough Road within the wider Stanton Cross development. The Stanton Cross development located to the East of the growth town of Wellingborough, gained outline planning permission in 2008 for a 'Mixed use development including 87ha of residential development; B1, B2 and B8 development, new public transport links (buses), new and enhanced walking and cycling routes and facilities, Country Park, Neighbourhood Centre, 2 Secondary local centres, construction of access roads, bridges and highway structures, footways, footpaths, bridleways; and associated works and facilities. (WP/2004/0600). A further application was approved in 2017 which amended the master plan (WP/15/00605/VAR) and included the approved scheme of an additional 550 houses. The site is allocated in the revised Masterplan for the proposed use.

The surrounding land use parcels to the site comprise the residential parcels of 11 and Part 12 including the Neighbourhood centre site and Route 10 to the immediate west, parcel 13 (currently under consideration WP/20/00071/REM for the erection of 135 dwellings) to the north and east. Residential parcels 17a (currently under consideration WP/20/00841/REM for the erection of 187 dwellings) and parcel 12b share the sites southern boundary.

Public Footpath UM9

An application to make an order under Section 257 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 has been made to the council under reference WP/20/00372/FPD for the diversion of a public footpath UM9 From Irthlingborough Road, to the Junction with UM8 And UM10, Wellingborough, Northamptonshire and is before Planning Committee members for consideration.

APPLICATION PROPOSAL AND BACKGROUND The application seeks reserved matters approval for the construction of a Primary school (for 420 pupils students between the ages of 4 to 11) and a children's centre pursuant to WP/15/00605/VAR and the requirements of the associated s106 agreement to be located within the Stanton Cross development.

Planning Committee 11 of 131 3 February 2021

In addition, further reserved matters have been submitted including vehicular parking, hard and soft landscaping, external amenity space and ancillary works pursuant to condition 2 of planning permission reference WP/15/00605/VAR which states:

Applications for details of the following matters (hereby referred to as the reserved matters) shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority before the commencement of development in each sub-area: a) the siting, design and external appearance of buildings; b) vehicle, cycle and foot access routes and parking; c) landscaping including boundary treatments and details of street furniture and lighting; d) layout and design of public open space; e) layout, design and specification of drainage infrastructure the development shall thereafter be implemented in accordance with the approved details.

Proposal The two storey structure with a storey and half hall and single storey elements building is located on a north south axis with a public realm plaza proposed at the corner of Route 10 and Irthlingborough Road. There are 74 car parking spaces (including seven disabled parking spaces) 56 covered cycle spaces and 3 Motorcycle parking spaces within the site boundary car park, access to the site is to be via Route 10 for vehicles. The site will include a hard playground area, MUGA and grassed playing field. The school is provided on behalf of Northamptonshire County Council. The occupier of the building is yet to be determined.

Conditions attached to the outline application for the wider site have been discharged allowing the commencement of development on the wider site. In addition, there are site specific conditions of the outline permission for each phase or plot, these being condition 43 (Lighting strategy) and Condition 46 (Construction Management). Relevant details were submitted under application WP/20/00733/CND and were approved by BCW on 21 Dec 2020.

As required through the provisions in the Town and Country Planning (Development Management Procedure) (England) Order 2015 and pursuant to paragraph 38 of the National Planning Policy Framework, in the consideration and assessment of this application and the accompanying proposals, the council as the local planning authority endeavoured to work with the applicant/developer in a positive and proactive way to ensure that the approved development is consistent with the relevant provisions in the framework. As a consequence, amended plans and supporting information has been submitted during the application process to deal with concerns relating to security, ecology and landscaping.

The application was accompanied by the following documents:

Planning Application forms; Planning Application fee (submitted under separate cover); Planning Application forms; Planning Application fee (submitted under separate cover); Application Drawings; Design and Access Statement; Planning Statement; Landscaping details/planting plan;

Planning Committee 12 of 131 3 February 2021

Preliminary Ecological Appraisal; Sustainable Design and Energy Statement; Completed Sustainable Design Checklist; Project Execution Plan comprising of Construction Transport Management Plan; Drainage Layout Plan; Utilities/M&E Site Services plan; Lighting strategy; Security and Crime Prevention Strategy Statement and Security Reference Plan

NATIONAL GUIDANCE, DEVELOPMENT PLAN POLICY AND SUPPLEMENTARY PLANNING DOCUMENTS/GUIDANCE National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) (19 February 2019) Planning Practice Guidance (PPG) National Design Guide (PPG) (September 2019) Planning for schools development: statement (August 2011)

North Northamptonshire Joint Core Strategy - Part 1 of the local plan (JCS) Policy 1 (Presumption in Favour of Sustainable Development) Policy 3 (Landscape Character) Policy 7 (Community Services and Facilities) Policy 8 (North Northamptonshire Place Shaping Principles) Policy 9 (Sustainable Buildings) Policy 10 (Provision of Infrastructure)

Plan for the Borough of Wellingborough - Part 2 of the local plan (PBW) Policy Site 1 (Wellingborough East)

Supplementary planning documents/guidance: Sustainable Design Biodiversity Planning Out Crime in Northamptonshire Upper Nene Valley Gravel Pits SPA Parking

SUMMARY OF REPLIES TO CONSULTATIONS/REPRESENTATIONS RECEIVED 1. Northamptonshire Highways - no objections.

Subject to compliance with the following requirements of the local highway authority no objection is raised to the application on highway safety or capacity grounds.

Access and parking arrangements have been previously discussed with the local highway authority and are satisfactory.

As it provides no benefit to the public at large it is not considered appropriate for the plaza area and planting to be adopted as highway maintainable at the public expense. The future ownership and responsibility for this area should be confirmed. Please ensure that the applicant is made fully aware of their responsibilities in respect of Public Footpath UM9 which crosses the proposed development site.

2. BCW Planning Policy - no objection.

Planning Committee 13 of 131 3 February 2021

No objection to the principle of the development and fully support the provision of the school to support the residential development on WEAST.

3. BCW Environment Protection Officer - contaminated land - no objection.

No objections to make on this application for land contamination.

Advise the following is included in the event that unexpected contamination is discovered during the works:

In the event that unexpected contamination is found at any time when carrying out the development hereby approved, it must be reported immediately to the local planning authority. Development works at the site shall cease and an investigation and risk assessment undertaken to assess the nature and extent of the unexpected contamination. A written report of the findings shall be submitted to and approved by the local planning authority, together with a scheme to remediate, if required, prior to further development on site taking place. Only once written approval from the local planning authority has been given shall development works recommence.

Reason: To ensure that risks from land contamination to the future users of the land and neighbouring land are minimised in accordance with Policies 6 and 8 of the North Northamptonshire Joint Core Strategy.

4. BCW Environment Health - no objection.

The relevant documents submitted with the application are the same as those submitted under WP/20/00733/CND. Our comments will be the same for both applications as reproduced below.

Condition 43 The application includes an external lighting layout plan which incorporates an illuminance plot. This indicates that the proposed lighting scheme has a minimal impact on the adjacent residential plots.

Condition 46 The applicant has submitted the following document: Project Execution Plan. (CDM 2015 - Construction Phase Plan (CPP)). The Primary School at Stanton Cross. Corner of Route 10 (New) and Irthlingborough Road, Finedon, Wellingborough, NN8 1RF. REV 2. 29 September 2020.

This document has been reviewed. It is aimed primarily at compliance with HASAWA requirements but also includes a risk assessment and proposals for controlling environmental noise and dust. The personnel responsible for implementing the safety and environmental controls are also identified. However, in carrying out the risk assessment any off-site noise and dust sensitive receptors have not been identified.

Table 5.4 of the CPP also lists piling a source of noise.

Planning Committee 14 of 131 3 February 2021

Comments.

There are no objections to the approval of the submitted details under condition 43.

We would be more comfortable with the approval of condition 46 if the CPP identified any noise and dust sensitive receptors that will be present at the time construction takes place and specifically assessed the level of risk to them and, if piling is to take place, the applicant should provide should submit details prior to approval of this condition.

Officer note - an amended CPP was received and approved under WP/20/00733/CND on 21 Dec 2020.

5. Northamptonshire Ecological Officer - no objection.

Initial comments 09 Dec 2020

The ecological survey identified a mature ash tree with high bat roost potential and barn owl roosting potential. At the time of the survey the tree was to be retained, however under the current scheme it would be lost due to widening of the road. The tree has not had the required bat and barn owl surveys to identify the potential impact on protected species and therefore the council does not have sufficient information to determine this application.

Once the bat and barn owl surveys have been done, I will be in a better position to recommend any mitigation needed.

Subsequent comments 22 Dec 2020 following submission of Bat survey report

In response to your consultation on additional information received for the above application at Area 36 Stanton Cross. Having reviewed the bat survey report I'm satisfied that the trees to be impacted do not have roosting bats and can be felled.

The other documents submitted are fine; my only comment would be regarding the soft landscaping plan dwg 3650/1 rev H. This includes a very small area of Emorsgate EH1 near the access. To get the full benefits of EH1 it would need an annual cut and the arisings removed. I note that the proposed landscape management plan does include this regime, but I'm mindful that schools do not have large landscaping budgets and that wildflower grasslands require non-standard management. Therefore, given the small size of the patch if the school would prefer I would also be happy for the area to be seeded with Emorsgate EL1 flowering lawn mix, which would provide good pollen and nectar sources while being able to tolerate a standard mowing regime. Either the EH1 or EL1 is fine, and I will leave it to the applicant to decide which would be better.

Finally, would recommend a suite of bird and bat boxes be installed as outlined in the ecology report. These should be integral, self-cleaning and/or maintenance free models; those suggested in section 4 of the ecology report would require annual cleaning. I would recommend these be secured by condition to ensure the most appropriate models are selected and that they are installed in appropriate locations.

Officer note - amended plans received reflecting above comments.

Planning Committee 15 of 131 3 February 2021

6. Northamptonshire Police - no objections.

Initial comments 01 Dec 2020

Northamptonshire Police is unable to provide specific comment to the proposed application due to a lack of information at this time. Please approach the applicant for information regarding security and crime prevention. The statement should include security of the school while open and closed. Building security including door and window security and site wide security including car park, and school plaza.

Policy 8 of the North Northamptonshire Joint Core Strategy Seeking to design out antisocial behaviour and crime and reduce the fear of crime through the creation of safe environments that benefit from natural surveillance, defensible spaces and other security measures having regard to the principles of the 'Secured by Design'.

Policy 7 of the North Northamptonshire Joint Core Strategy Designing places where people can be active, have places to meet and play, seeking to design out crime and ensuring that appropriate community and fire safety design considerations are incorporated within new development schemes will contribute towards the long-term sustainability and resilience of developments. Another important aspect is ensuring community safety and cohesion. Measures to assist with counter terrorism, community safety and security will need to be incorporated into the design of buildings and spaces, particularly public spaces that are likely to attract crowds.

No further comments.

7. Northamptonshire County Council Archaeological Advisor - no objection.

Thank you for consulting me on the above application. The area has been quarried and no survival of archaeological remains is anticipated. Therefore, I have no comments to make on the proposals.

8. North Northamptonshire Joint Planning Delivery Unit - no objection.

The planning application addresses the majority of layout/design issues tabled throughout the preapplication process. As such, NNJPDU design have no further comments to add.

9. Finedon Parish Council - no objection

No comments to make.

10. Sport England - no objection.

The proposed development does not fall within either our statutory remit (Statutory Instrument 2015/595), or non-statutory remit (National Planning Policy Guidance (PPG) Par. 003 Ref. ID: 37-003-20140306), therefore, Sport England has not provided a detailed response in this case but would wish to give the following advice to aid the assessment of this application.

Planning Committee 16 of 131 3 February 2021

11. The Ramblers - no objections.

Public footpath UM9 follows the hard track which crosses the application site.

Extinguishment and diversion of UM9 to route 10 was considered in WP/20/00372/FPD. A Temporary Traffic Regulation Order may be necessary as noted by NCC Highways.

12. Commission for Dark Skies - no objections.

Our comments are based upon the information contained in the Sustainable Design and Energy Statement and the External Lighting Layout plan dated 1/10/20. CFDS notes that the site is Environmental Zone E3 as categorized by the ILE Guidance table for lighting levels. This gives a maximum upward waste light allowance of 5%. The proposed lighting schemes comes in at 2%, well within permitted levels.

We note that the proposed building mounted lights EX1/E and the column mounted lights EX2B have excellent control of waste light. The two EX3 lights suggest less control of upward light but given that only two appear to be proposed we do not consider that this will be a significant concern. Also, we note the site includes a MUGA but no lighting proposal was obvious.

CFDS considers the plan proposed meets Local and National guidance for the control of Light Pollution.

13. Councillor Gill Mercer, Finedon Division, Northamptonshire County Council -

I am very pleased that this school is going to be provided for this new community. I would ask however if sprinklers are to be installed in the school. I cannot see any mention of them. Also has Northants Fire and Rescue been consulted? I would urge that sprinklers are installed in the school. This is highly recommended by the National Fire Chiefs Council.

According to UK fire statistics for England, there were 686 fires in schools in 2016/17. The Association of British Insurers say the most expensive school fires typically cost around £2.8 million to address and, over the last four years, an average of 24 of these large loss fires have occurred every year totalling £67.2million. Aside from the financial impact, UK school fires disrupt the education of an estimated 90,000 children and students annually.

I would urge you to make sure that sprinklers are installed.

Applicant response to Councillor Mercer -

A response was provided in our Security and Crime Prevention Strategy, point 10 (dated 22/12/20) and the fire management strategy and design of the school is based on BS9999: Code of practice for fire safety in the design, management and use of buildings, which provides a best practice framework for fire safety. This approach prioritises the Health and Safety of the people in the building and does not require fire suppression sprinklers within the building of this nature and scale.

Planning Committee 17 of 131 3 February 2021

Furthermore, the school design to BS9999, was checked and validated by an independent Fire Engineering Consultant - Innovation Fire Engineering - who produced a Fire Strategy Report confirming the adequacy of the design without the need for fire suppression sprinklers. Neither the Department of Education or NCC does not require fire suppression sprinklers in all schools.

Officer response to Councillor Mercer -

Northamptonshire Fire and Rescue Service were consulted for 21 days on 18.11.2020.

No further comments received.

14. BCW Landscape officer - no comments received.

15. Anglian Water - no comments received.

16. Natural England - no comments received.

Comments received through pre-application -

No objection. Based on the plans submitted, Natural England considers that the proposed development will not have significant adverse impacts on statutorily protected nature conservation sites or landscape.

European sites

Based on the plans submitted, Natural England considers that the proposed development will not have likely significant effects on statutorily protected sites and has no objection to the proposed development. To meet the requirements of the Habitats Regulations, we advise you to record your decision that a likely significant effect can be ruled out.

Sites of Special Scientific Interest

Based on the plans submitted, Natural England considers that the proposed development will not have likely significant effects on statutorily protected sites and has no objection to the proposed development.

17. Neighbours - no third party or neighbour comments received.

18. Northamptonshire County Council Lead Local Flood Authority - no objections.

We would advise that surface water drainage has been addressed

ASSESSMENT AND REASONED JUSTIFICATION The proposal raises the following main issues:

- conformity with the development plan and material considerations; - design, layout and the effect on the character and appearance of the surrounding area;

Planning Committee 18 of 131 3 February 2021

- effect on archaeology; - effect on landscape visual amenity; - sustainability - effect on flood risk and surface water drainage; - effect on foul sewage; - effect on noise: - noise on air quality; - effect on biodiversity; - effect on SPA - Upper Nene Valley Gravel Pits; - effect/impact on the living conditions of the neighbouring occupiers and the future occupiers of the development; - effect/impact on highway safety in relation to the proposed access arrangement and parking provision; - contamination; - crime and disorder; - conditions

Conformity with the development plan and material considerations Section 38(6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 states that "If regard is to be had to the development plan for the purposes of any determination to be made under the Planning Acts, the determination must be made in accordance with the development plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise."

The Governments Planning for schools development 2011 statement highlights that:

The Government is firmly committed to ensuring there is sufficient provision to meet growing demand for state-funded school places, increasing choice and opportunity in state-funded education and raising educational standards. State-funded schools - which include Academies and free schools, as well as local authority maintained schools (community, foundation and voluntary aided and controlled schools) - educate the vast majority of children in England. The Government wants to enable new schools to open, good schools to expand and all schools to adapt and improve their facilities. This will allow for more provision and greater diversity in the state-funded school sector to meet both demographic needs and the drive for increased choice and higher standards. For instance, creating free schools remains one of the Government's flagship policies, enabling parents, teachers, charities and faith organisations to use their new freedoms to establish state-funded schools and make a real difference in their communities. By increasing both the number of school places and the choice of state- funded schools, we can raise educational standards and so transform children's lives by helping them to reach their full potential.

It is the Government's view that the creation and development of state-funded schools is strongly in the national interest and that planning decision-makers can and should support that objective, in a manner consistent with their statutory obligations.

Policy 1 of the JCS is clear that when considering development proposals, the local planning authority will take a positive approach that reflects the presumption in favour of sustainable development as set out within the revised NPPF.

The principle of development on this site was established within the granting of outline planning permission WP/2004/0600 which was approved on 28th January 2008,

Planning Committee 19 of 131 3 February 2021

subsequently varied through WP/15/00605/VAR. Where outline planning permission has been granted (as set out above) in order to proceed with development, details known as Reserved Matters need to be submitted to the local planning authority for approval. This application seeks approval of reserved matters for a Primary school and children's centre, including vehicular parking, hard and soft landscaping, external amenity space and ancillary works pursuant to planning permission reference WP/15/00605/VAR and the associated s106 legal agreement.

The s106 agreement to the planning permission summaries the requirements of the first primary school along with the children's centre and highlights that these are to be delivered as part of the Sustainable Urban Extension (SUE). The developer is required to provide '2.056 hectares of fully serviced land which is suitable and sufficient to provide for the first Primary School and Children's Centre'.

Schedule 2 of the s106 sets out the specific parameters of the primary school and children's centre as follows:

The Site area is to comprise:

1. Playing fields 2. Playgrounds 3. Staff and visitor parking 4. Hard landscaping 5. Soft landscaping 6. Outdoor covered play 7. School buildings 8. Children's centre building

The School Buildings should be sized between 2,000-2,500 sqm. and is to include:

1. Classrooms 2. Hall 3. Studio 4. Library 5. Administrative and ancillary facilities

The Children's centre buildings should be sized between 600-850 sqm. and is to include:

1. Teaching/care facilities for children aged 2-5 years 2. Meeting/training rooms 3. Kitchen facilities 4. Administrative and ancillary facilities

Future education requirements and the aspiration of the education authority to build schools where and when needed have been reflected in the distribution of development, and have underpinned the strategy to provide SUEs of a sufficient scale to incorporate these facilities. The SUEs will include district/local centres of an appropriate scale with convenience shops and facilities such as medical centres and schools to meet the day-to-day needs of residents.

Planning Committee 20 of 131 3 February 2021

The erection of a Primary school and children's centre is in support of the associated residential development that lies within the Stanton Cross (SUE). The site lies within what is known as parcel 36 and is allocated for the proposed use. The SUEs are described as the key building blocks for growth in North Northamptonshire during and beyond the plan period to 2031. These large mixed-use developments are an opportunity to create well planned and managed new neighbourhoods that integrate physically and socially with the existing towns. The overall objectives for the SUEs are that they must be: sustainable and provide communities which are active, inclusive, safe, well run, environmentally sensitive, well designed and built, well connected, thriving, well served and fair for everyone.

Policy Site 1 of the PBW relates to the Wellingborough East site and supports the comprehensive development of the site. In order to support the development of this urban extension it is necessary to provide the key infrastructure including a Primary school and children's centre as is being proposed.

Policy 10 of the JCS relates to infrastructure and is clear that development must be supported by the timely delivery of infrastructure, series and facilities necessary to meet the needs arising from the development and to support the development of North Northamptonshire. The provision of this Primary school and children's centre will provide the necessary infrastructure to support the development of the Stanton Cross SUE.

An environmental statement (August 2004/05) was submitted to and approved by Borough of Wellingborough Council under the original outline permission WP/2004/0600/O as the application constituted an environmental impact assessment application. An Environmental Statement Supplement was approved by Borough of Wellingborough Council under s.73 outline permission WP/15/00605/VAR.

In addition to the specific NPPF requirements set out above, paragraph 128 states that 'applicants will be expected to work closely with those affected by their proposals to evolve designs that take account of the views of the community. Applications that can demonstrate early, proactive and effective engagement with the community should be looked on more favourably'.

The application form at question five indicates that pre-application advice has been sought from the council. The NPPF from paragraph 41 extols the virtues of applicants engaging in pre application discussion with the council to resolve any issues that may arise to help applicants avoid any unnecessary delays and costs. The applicant entered into lengthy pre-application discussions with Wellingborough Council officers and North Northamptonshire Joint Planning and Delivery Unit, design team. This process allowed the development of the proposal to be informed through the assessment of massing, materials and entrances that has resulted in the submitted design. In addition, discussions have taken place with NCC Highways Officers. As a result, there were no objections to the proposal received through statutory consultees.

The proposals for a Primary school and children's centre are in accordance with the governing outline permission and acceptable in principle subject to other material planning considerations as covered in this report.

Planning Committee 21 of 131 3 February 2021

Design, layout and the effect on the character and appearance of the surrounding area JCS at policy 8 (d) (i) and (ii) describes the principles that proposed development must take into account with regards to its effect on the character and appearance of an area.

Table 2: Place Shaping Principles for North Northamptonshire Towns of the JCS states that 'New or redeveloped local centres, schools and other civic uses should be located on the most accessible streets, and their location within the site should relate to the wider town. This may involve creating more than one entrance point.'

Condition 3 of the outline application WP/15/00605/VAR requires a Design code and/or design brief for that sub-area to be submitted and approved in writing by the local planning authority. Pursuant to this, application WP/20/00032/CND approved the Amended Neighbourhood Centre and South Slopes Design Brief Revision C on 28 April 2020.

Condition 5 of outline planning permission WP/15/00605/VAR requires reserved matters to accord with the Neighbourhood Centre and South Slopes Areas Design Brief.

The sites' location within 'The Neighbourhood Centre and South Slopes Area 'is sited in a 'visually prominent location on the main ridge line at the arrival point and connection of the main access and movement routes, key desire lines and vistas. This area will therefore be the physical and communal focus for Stanton Cross'. The application as submitted benefits from extensive pre-application discussions with BCW and Design Officers at the NNJPDU that have informed the final proposals.

Character The application site is to be located in an allocated mixed use area with a predominance of surrounding residential parcels. The Outline Planning Permission requires the delivery of a 2 form entry primary school and children's centre, community centre, a supermarket, convenience retail units, food and drink units set around an "urban square" with bus facilities and car and cycle parking (a site for a health centre was also required but that was not taken up when offered) in the Neighbourhood Centre. This arrangement creates a focussed concentration of the uses, that are not severed by the busy road, and therefore, will help to ensure the Centre's vitality and vibrancy.

Design In addition to an assessment of the proposals against policy 8 of the JCS, the Neighbourhood Centre and South Slopes Areas Design Brief sets out a series of design principles to ensure that submissions appropriately respond to their setting and role within the wider development. The Brief states that the primary school building should act as a local landmark, positioned to address the principal road/avenue junction, with a strong relationship to the central square.

The proposal is considered to positively address Route 10 and Irthlingborough Road in its design and functionality with well-articulated public facades.

Planning Committee 22 of 131 3 February 2021

The parapet on the main frontage provides a distinctive architectural feature using added height to add emphasis to the visually prominent south west corner of the building, accentuating the main entrance and creating a keyway marker.

There is a high quality landscaped open school frontage and plaza with tree planting, seating areas and potentially public art (subsequent to separate application). This ensures that the school has a strong visual relationship with the central square and allow the spaces to be read 'as one', calming traffic, enhancing interconnectivity and promoting social cohesion. The secure boundaries are set back from the public realm, softened with landscaping.

The proposed Primary school and children's centre are of a contemporary design, with a simple form. Vertical western red cedar will be utilised on the key plaza corner with the main entrance an Anthracite Trespa horizontal cladding to contrast the timber cladding and emphasises as an entrance.

The main teachings block is silver grey Trespa horizontal cladding whilst the hall will be Buff wire cut brick. The setback kitchen building is Anthracite Trespa horizontal cladding with silver grey Trespa horizontal cladding to accentuate the dark grey windows.

All doors and windows are to be dark grey polyester powder coated aluminium frames with the fenestration pattern including regularly spaced windows, which reflect the internal layout of the class bases.

The submitted elevations have undergone review and consultation through the pre- application process. The resultant proposal is considered to have responded positively to comments received and is in general accordance with the design steer outlined in the adopted Neighbourhood Centre and South Slopes Areas Design Brief.

Scale The scale of the buildings proposed are commensurate with the adopted Design Brief and the wider Stanton Cross Masterplan approved under the outline application, it is therefore considered that the proposal will have a positive impact on the character of the area. The parapet to the school represents the highest part of the building which is the key frontage overlooking the plaza and urban square at 8.60m. The remaining built form is predominantly part-two, part-one storey building to be located towards the south-western boundary of Land Parcel 36.

Layout The layout has been prescribed through the requirements of the associated s106 agreement that set out the parameters of required development and in accordance with the requirements of the adopted Design Brief. The combined overall floor area for the proposed design is 2,606m² as prescribed through the s106. The location of the built development is focussed on the junction of Route 10 and Irthlingborough Road presents the main entrances for the School and the Children's Centre to create a strong link with the Plaza and is considered to function as a key part of the neighbourhood centre. The requisite MUGA, Soft and Hard Plays areas are provided within the site as required. The hall, studio and kitchen are positioned at the northern end of the main building so that they can be segregated from the rest of the school and more easily used for out of hours activities via the community-users entrance. Car parking is located to the rear to with direct access to Route 10.

Planning Committee 23 of 131 3 February 2021

The building's form, massing, rhythm façade treatment and site layout are carefully designed to create some character and visual interest to promote the urban square as a focus within the Stanton Cross site. On balance, based on the illustrations shown, the proposed building will not be a negative addition to the existing skyline which is considered to be in accordance with the Neighbourhood Centre and South Slopes Design Brief and JCS policy 8 (d) (i) and (ii).

Effect on archaeology JCS policy 2 (d) requires that where proposals would result in the unavoidable and justifiable loss of archaeological remains, provision should be made for recording and the production of a suitable archive and report.

Condition 38 of WP/15/00605/VAR states: 'Development of each sub area or infrastructure element hereby permitted shall not commence until a programme or archaeological work in accordance with a written scheme of investigation (including site based archaeological survey, trial fieldworks to evaluate the archaeological potential of the sub area and any work necessary to preserve remains in situ and or by record), or watching brief, as appropriate, has been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority for that sub area.

Through consultation, Northamptonshire County Council Archaeologist noted that as the area was previously quarried, it is not anticipated that archaeological remains endure. Therefore, no objection was made on the proposals with regard to archaeology which are consequently considered to accord with policy 2 (d) of the JCS.

Effect on landscape visual amenity Policy 3 (a), (b) and (e) of the JCS states that development should be located and designed in a way that is sensitive to its landscape setting retaining and where possible enhancing the distinctive qualities of the landscape character area which it would affect. Given the context of the application site and proposal, the agricultural nature of the site negates any landscape qualities to enhance however there are opportunities for meaningful enhancements within site. As the context of the site is evolving and changing and the surrounding parcels 12b, 13 and 17 are approved in principle for residential use, the landscaping proposals should also minimise impact on neighbours. Due to the high audience of the site from the existing Irthlingborough Road proposed Route 10, the school needs to present a high-quality landscaped frontage and plaza to provide a strong visual relationship to the wider area. Details of the Plaza are to be determined through a subsequent planning application.

The adopted Neighbourhood Centre and South Slopes Design Brief Revision C requires:

Development to 'wrap' private car parking and service areas where possible. Where this cannot be achieved soft landscaping should be used to minimise visibility and 'soften' the impact of vehicles and service yards on the streetscene. The introduction of native-species trees and hedgerows towards the northern boundary of the site and within the proposed car parking, assist in informally softening the proposals whilst providing clear delineation and defensible space between uses. Additional proposals over the site include grass areas for leisure activities, wildflower areas and shrub beds for biodiversity value and visual interest.

Planning Committee 24 of 131 3 February 2021

The introduction of native-species trees and hedgerows towards the northern boundary of the site and within the proposed car parking, assist in informally softening the proposals whilst providing clear delineation and defensible space between uses. Additional proposals over the site include grass areas for leisure activities, wildflower areas and shrub beds for biodiversity value and visual interest

A Landscape Management Specification report was submitted in conjunction with the Landscape Proposal plan that describes the management/maintenance techniques for the site up to Year 5 in detail and basic recommendations to beyond Year 5.

Plaza The adopted Design Brief requires 'A high quality landscaped open school frontage and plaza will incorporate tree planting, seating areas and potentially public art. This should seek to ensure that the school has a strong visual relationship with the central square and allow the spaces to be read 'as one', calming traffic, enhancing interconnectivity and promoting social cohesion.'

Through collaborative working with Vistry who are to make an application for this area, the proposed school and plaza read 'as one' space as required in the Design Brief by being unenclosed with 'linkages in the landscaping and materials used throughout these spaces'.

A suitably worded boundary treatment conditions in addition to the submitted Detailed Landscape Proposals Plan would secure a net environmental gain through new planting of native species in accordance with JCS policy 3 and the adopted Design Brief.

Sustainability Policy 9 of the JCS is clear that development should incorporate measures to ensure high standards of resource and energy efficiency and reduction in carbon emissions. The policy states that Design and access statements must demonstrate how sustainable design principles have been addressed. In particular subject to economic viability, developments of 1000+ square metres of non-residential floorspace should, as a minimum meet BREEAM very good or equivalent nationally recognised standards.

Prior to submission, it was confirmed that BREEAM would not be applied to this project due to viability issues and that an application should be supported by a sustainability statement that sets out what measures will be taken to the design of the building in relation to sustainability and energy efficiency.

In support of Policy 9, a Sustainable Design & Energy Statement was submitted that highlighted that through minimising the buildings overall environmental impact and reducing its resource use, it is intended to exceed the performance standards required by Building Regulations. Measures to achieve high levels of energy efficiency proposed are outlined in the statement through minimising waste, sustainable procurement of materials during construction and operation and offsite construction methods help to reduce waste during construction.

A minimum water efficiency standard equivalent to the BREEAM standard for 2 credits for water use levels shall be implemented with leak detection system and flow control devices being installed. Lighting in offices and classrooms shall generally conform to the requirements of CIBSE LG5, BB90: Lighting Design for Schools, The Institute of

Planning Committee 25 of 131 3 February 2021

Lighting Engineers, and applicable British standards including 'absence off' lighting controls.

The statement concludes that the building is fit for purpose and has been designed to adapt to future climate challenges, whilst complying with Approved Document L and 9 in accordance with JCS policy 9.

Effect on flood risk and drainage The JCS at policy 5 sets out policies aimed at preventing or reducing flood risk.

A Flood Risk Assessment was submitted in support of the application outlining the potential risk of flooding and the management of surface water drainage. The outlined that drainage has been designed in general accordance with the findings of the approved wider Flood Rick Assessment for Stanton Cross as a whole. The proposed drainage strategy for the development disposes of all surface water via infiltration, therefore not increasing the flood risk or impact to the neighbouring areas. The surface water drainage will be managed and disposed of within the site boundary.

The Lead Local Flood Authority (LLFA) and Environment Agency (EA) were consulted and initially raised objections to the scheme, specifically a lack of supporting information. In response a technical note and updated Flood Risk Assessment were provided by the applicant to the satisfaction of the LLFA and EA subject to conditions.

With conditions imposed to secure a drainage scheme, the proposal complies with JCS policy 5. The risk of flooding will not be increased on or off site and an adequate drainage system and method of surface water disposal will be secured through approval of condition details.

Effect on foul sewage JCS policy 6 requires new development to be supported by the timely delivery of infrastructure.

JCS Policy 10 (b) requires new development to minimise increases in the demand for additional/expanded water infrastructure. Whilst policy 10 (c) states that planning permission will only be granted if it can be demonstrated that there will be sufficient infrastructure capacity provided within an agreed timescale to support and meet all the requirements which arise from the proposed development. Policy 10 (d) continues by saying that the council and developers should work with infrastructure providers to identify viable solutions to deliver infrastructure where appropriate by phasing conditions, the use of interim measures and the provision of co-located facilities.

The foul drainage from this development is in the catchment of Broadholme Water Recycling Centre, which currently does not have capacity to treat the flows from the development site. Anglian Water are obligated to accept the foul flows from the development with the benefit of planning consent and would therefore take the necessary steps to ensure that there is sufficient treatment capacity should the planning authority grant reserved matters consent.

The application is therefore compliant with regard to JCS policy 10.

Planning Committee 26 of 131 3 February 2021

Effect on noise To ensure quality of life and safer and healthier communities the JCS at policy 8 (e) (ii) states that new development should be prevented from contributing to or being adversely affected by unacceptable levels of noise.

With regard to concerns over noise, under the current proposals the MUGA and pitches proposed are not to be artificially lit so their use will be curtailed by daylight hours in the winter months however given the context of the location of a sports field within the grounds of a school, there is potential for noise intrinsic to the functioning of the site as a school that is to be expected.

The location of any playing pitches required by the school will be determined by future occupiers of the school. Outdoor covered play space is proposed to be provided along the eastern boundary of the main building away from sensitive boundaries.

The council's environmental protection officer has not identified noise emanating from the development once constructed as an area of concern. It should be identified that the council's environmental protection service has powers to deal with any unacceptable noise the development may create as necessary under the provisions of the Environmental Protection Act 1990.

It is considered that the wider benefits to the community outweigh the minor potential for the proposal to adversely affect the amenity of the nearby residents. The noise impacts of the proposals are not considered unacceptable when judged against JCS Policy 8.

Effect on air quality To ensure quality of life and safer and healthier communities the JCS at policy 8 (e) (i) requires development not to have an unacceptable impact on amenities by reason of pollution, whilst 8 (e) (ii) goes further by stating that both new and existing development should be prevented from contributing to or being adversely affected by unacceptable levels of air pollution.

The proposals are not considered to result in any adverse impacts to air quality. Any dis-amenity that may result during the construction phase are suitably controlled and mitigated through the approval of a site specific Construction Management plan (Condition 46 of the outline WP/15/00605/VAR) under application WP/20/00733/CND approved by BCW on 21 Dec 2020.

As the proposed development includes the provision for vehicle parking. A key theme of the revised NPPF is that developments should enable future occupiers to make "green" vehicle choices and paragraph 105 (e) "incorporate facilities for charging plug-in and other ultra-low emission vehicles". Policy 15 (c) of the JCS seeks for the design of development to give priority to sustainable means of transport including measures to contribute towards meeting the modal shift targets in the Northamptonshire Transportation Plan.

As the Councils Environmental Health officers raised no objections in this regard, the application is considered to accord with the above quoted policies.

Planning Committee 27 of 131 3 February 2021

Effect on biodiversity Paragraph 40 of the Natural Environment and Rural Communities Act, under the heading of 'duty to conserve biodiversity' states "every public authority must, in exercising its functions, have regard, so far as is consistent with the proper exercise of those functions, to the purpose of conserving biodiversity".

The NPPF at chapter 15 'conserving and enhancing the natural environment' sets out government views on minimising the impacts on biodiversity, providing net gains where possible and contributing to halt the overall decline in biodiversity. This is a view supported by JCS policy 4 - biodiversity and geodiversity that sets out policy requirements for the protection and where possible, a net gain in biodiversity.

A submitted Preliminary Ecological Appraisal concluded that the majority of the habitats recorded on site during the extended Phase 1 habitat survey include semi improved neutral grassland, hedgerow, arable cultivated land, scattered trees and hardstanding and as such they are considered to be of low ecological value.

As a consequence of the development of the site as proposed that will result in the loss of said habitats, measures have been proposed within the Preliminary Ecological Appraisal to mitigate for the loss of these habitats.

These include but are not limited to:

New grassland seeded with either a species rich grass mix or a wildflower meadow mix to increase species diversity. Additional native hedgerow, to include at least five native species. Integrated Bat roost boxes. Bird nest boxes - Four Schwegler 1MR Avianex and two sparrow terraces. Hedgehog gaps in boundaries.

Through consultation with the Northamptonshire Ecological Officer, amendments were made to the landscaping scheme to ensure a more appropriate grass species and a condition was requested to secure the mitigation measures recommended in the supporting Preliminary Ecological Appraisal.

A consultation request was sent to Natural England under this application with no response received. They did however respond through pre-application discussions and considered that the proposed development will not have likely significant effects on statutorily protected sites and has no objection to the proposed development. With the landscaping scheme, boundary treatments, as well as the Mitigation and Compensation measures secured by condition, it is considered that the applicants have demonstrated that a net gain in biodiversity can be achieved on site in accordance with policy 4 of the JCS.

Effect on SPA - Upper Nene Valley Gravel Pits

The Upper Nene Valley Gravel Pits Special Protection Area (SPA)/Ramsar Site is legally protected by the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010 (the Habitats Regulations).

Planning Committee 28 of 131 3 February 2021

Policy 4 of the JCS on biodiversity and geodiversity states that developments likely to have an adverse effect either alone or in combination on the Upper Nene Valley Gravel Pits SPA must satisfy the requirements of the Habitat Regulations and avoid or mitigate any impacts identified.

The Upper Nene Valley Gravel Pits Supplementary Planning Document (SPD) has been produced to help local planning authorities, developers and others ensure that development has no adverse effect on the SPA, in accordance with the legal requirements of the Habitat Regulations. The SPD has been developed with Natural England and the RSPB. A mitigation strategy adopted as an addendum to the SPA SPD provides further guidance for development within 3km of the SPA.

Since these policies were adopted there has been a ruling made by the Courts of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) on the interpretation of the Habitats Directive in the case of People Over Wind and Sweetman vs Coillte Teoranta (ref: C 323/17). This requires development relying on mitigation in relation to the Habitat Regulations to no longer be considered at the screening stage but taken forward and considered at the appropriate assessment stage to inform a decision as whether no adverse effect on site integrity can be ascertained. The council, before making a decision, must therefore ensure that Reserved Matters applications for new development including a school comply with the Habitats Regulations.

The Site comes within 0.65 km of the European designated site Upper Nene Valley Gravel Pits SSSI, SPA, Ramsar. The golden plover (Pluvialis apricaria) is a qualifying feature for the designated site and will feed on the surrounding agricultural habitat, the dominant habitat on the Site. There is potential that the development of the Site may result in a significant effect on this species, either alone or in combination with other development sites.

As a consequence, a Habitat Regulations Assessment (HRA) screening assessment was undertaken to assess the likelihood of the proposed new school resulting in a significant effect on the qualifying features of the Upper Nene Valley.

The effects of development on this site were assessed in conjunction with the original Environmental Statement, and the preparation and implementation of a Habitat Management and Access Plan was secured by conditions attached to the outline planning permission. In their response to this application Natural England stated that they had no objection to the proposed development. However, as part of the discussions with Natural England in relation to the Section 73 application (WP.15.00605.VAR) the applicants have agreed to a condition that will require the implementation of the Habitat Management and Access Plan prior to the occupation of the 500th dwelling or the start of construction of routes 2 or 7.

This management plan is of critical importance to ensuring that the Upper Nene Valley Gravel Pits SSSI and SPA are protected and maintained in favourable condition through the construction of Routes 2 and 7 as well as the wider Stanton Cross development. As well as specifying long term management for the SSSI within the application area the management plan includes details of landscape design for the flood storage and ecological compensation areas and an access management strategy for the SSSI.

Planning Committee 29 of 131 3 February 2021

The Habitats Regulations include a stringent assessment process (Habitats Regulations Assessment (HRA)) which competent authorities must follow when considering plans or projects that could have significant effects on European Sites. As a competent authority the proposal's impact has been assessed.

With respect to Stanton Cross, Natural England have been consulted at all stages of the process - outline, Section 73, discharge of conditions and reserved matters applications. For this reserved matters application (Parcel 36) Natural England was consulted and has raised no objections. Furthermore, they have confirmed in writing that this development will not have significant adverse impacts on designated sites:

- Upper Nene valley Gravel Pits Special Site of Scientific Interest, (SSSI) - Upper Nene Valley Gravel Pits Special Protection Area, (SPA) and Ramsar Site.

The SUE provides for a 47Ha Town and Country Park as part of the wider development. This is anticipated to provide recreational greenspace for future residents as an alternative to recreating in the SPA. As set out above specific conditions are also imposed on the outline/variation to ensure appropriate mitigation and consideration is given to the SPA.

Due to the nature of the proposed development and its location the main potential significant effect is restricted to loss of supporting habitat (i.e. Functionally Linked Land (FLL).

This Reserved Matters application is in accordance with the agreed masterplan and the parameters set out within the EIA, it is not anticipated therefore that any additional impacts that have not already been tested will occur.

The implementation of the Habitat Management and Access Plan is secured via condition and this will provide suitable mitigation in relation to recreational pressure of the proposed development and the effects of construction of Routes 2 and 7. The overall masterplan also requires the provision of significant areas of open space including the River Ise Town and Country Park. Based on current best available scientific evidence there is no likely significant effect on the birds through loss of supporting habitat. A conclusion of no adverse effect on the integrity on the Upper Nene Valley Gravel Pits Special Protection Area and Ramsar Site can therefore be reached.

Effect/impact on the living conditions of the neighbouring occupiers and the future occupiers of the development The JCS at policy 8 (e) (i) details policy relating to the protection of amenity of neighbouring occupiers.

Matters relating to noise are addressed above and it is noted that there is potential for noise intrinsic to the functioning of the site as a school that is to be expected. Surrounding parcels are principally allocated for residential use and although applications for these are pending, the development has been orientated away from any shared boundary to avoid any direct conflict with surrounding development. A combination of boundary treatments to be secured through condition and the separation distances inherent in the site layout are considered to negate any impact on the living conditions of the impending neighbouring occupiers.

Planning Committee 30 of 131 3 February 2021

Details in relation to external lighting have also been submitted by the applicant that were assessed through consultation with The Commission for Dark Skies, Environmental Health Officers and NCC Ecologist who have raised no objections.

The proposal on balance and subject to adequate lighting, landscaping and boundary treatments, is not considered to be significantly visually intrusive in the setting and unlikely to cause an adverse impact to the detriment of neighbouring amenity. The proposed development is considered in accordance with JCS policy 8 and the Neighbourhood Centre and South Slopes Areas Design Brief.

Effect/Impact on highway safety in relation to (the proposed access arrangement and parking provision) JCS policy 8 (b) (i) gives a number of requirements that new development should achieve with regards to highway, pedestrian and other sustainable transport matters. JCS policy 8 (b) (ii) seeks to ensure a satisfactory means of access and provision for parking, servicing and manoeuvring in accordance with adopted standards.

It should be highlighted that as the application has been through extensive pre- application discussions, the submitted details have been assessed and agreed prior to submission resulting in positive comments from Highways officers to the proposals. The submitted information indicates that the application will result in 46 full time equivalent Staff members and 420 pupils.

Access One vehicular gated access point is proposed located towards the north-western boundary of Parcel 36 from Route 10 leading to the staff and visitor parking areas positioned to the west and north of the building. Through negotiations prior to submission, Highway officers have indicated through a no objection response that sufficient provision has been made to accommodate vehicles picking up and dropping off pupils at the school without resulting in any adverse impacts to the wider highway network. A dedicated area for service and delivery vehicles in indicated on the submitted plans.

Pedestrian Access The principle entrances to the School and Children's Centre will be located along the southern elevation of the building facing Irthlingborough Road and the proposed Plaza. Secondary pedestrian entrances to the site will be provided along Irthlingborough Road and Route 10. The positioning of the building at the intersection of Route 10 and Irthlingborough Road result in the main entrances for the School and the Children's Centre creating a focal point giving prominence to the Plaza as required by the Neighbourhood Centre and South Slopes Areas Design Brief.

Parking The 2016 Northamptonshire Parking Standards for a Class C2: Residential Institutions recommends:

1 space per full time member of staff (pro rata for part time staff). 1 space per 15 pupils for visitors and school drop off/pick up of 25% of all traffic generated by the facility is provided. 10% of total parking spaces to be disabled spaces.

Planning Committee 31 of 131 3 February 2021

Provision should also be made for covered cycle parking for both staff and students.

The car park located to the west and north of the building is indicated as providing 74 car parking spaces, 28 of which are provided for visitors (1 space for every 15 pupils) with one car parking space per full time equivalent staff member (46).

56 cycle parking spaces are proposed within 4 separate shelters with 14 cycles each as requested by NCC Parking standards. 3 motorcycle parking bays will be provided

The proposed parking and access arrangements have been found to be acceptable through consultation with NCC Highways officers.

It is noted that detail pertaining to a site specific Construction Environmental Management Plan have received formal approval as conditions of the outline approval. The overall layout, parking, access and accessibility are considered acceptable and compliant with JCS policy 8.

Contamination The JCS at policy 6 says that local planning authorities will seek to maximise the delivery of development through the re-use of suitable previously developed land within the urban areas. Where development is intended on a site known or suspected of being contaminated a remediation strategy will be required to manage the contamination. The policy goes on to inform that planning permission will be granted where it can be established that the site can safely and viably be developed with no significant impact on either future users of the development or on ground surface and waters.

As the outline application sufficiently considered contamination concerns, no objections were raised from the councils Environmental Health officers subject to the imposition of an unexpected contamination condition. The proposed development complies with policy 6 of the JCS.

Crime and disorder Section 17 of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998 details the need for the council to do all that it reasonably can to prevent, crime and disorder in its area.

The JCS at policy 8 (e) (iv) sets out the policy requirement for new development to seek to design out crime and disorder and reduce the fear of crime. The adopted designing out crime supplementary planning guidance gives detailed advice this issue.

The revised NPPF at paragraph 127 (f) state that decisions should aim to ensure that developments create safe, inclusive and accessible environments which promote health and wellbeing with a high standard of amenity for existing and future users and where crime and disorder, and the fear of crime, do not undermine quality of life or community cohesion and resilience.

The Northamptonshire Police Crime Prevention Design Advisor was consulted on matters pertaining to crime and disorder. Following the submission of an updated Security and Crime Prevention Strategy Statement, no objections were raised subject to conditions requiring details of any subsequent CCTV system to be installed.

Planning Committee 32 of 131 3 February 2021

Comments that raised concerns over the surveillance of car parking areas were clarified by the applicant who highlighted that 'staff car parking is behind perimeter fencing/locked gates managed by the school except for school pupil/teacher access and egress at the start and finish of the school day. Access to the site outside of these times will be via an intercom system at the gates to allow entrance outside of these periods for visitors, deliveries/refuse collections etc. which is controlled by school reception'. Therefore the rear of the building is secured and closed off to public as required by the Neighbourhood Centre and South Slopes Areas Design Brief.

As such the scheme is considered in accordance with Policy 8 of the JCS and the Neighbourhood Centre and South Slopes Areas Design Brief.

Conditions With regards to conditions, paragraph 56 of the revised NPPF states that planning conditions should only be imposed where they are: necessary, relevant to planning and to the development to be permitted, enforceable, precise and reasonable in all other respects. The PPG re-iterates the advice on the use of planning conditions and also states the following:

- specific controls outside planning legislation may provide an alternative means of managing certain matters (for example, works on public highways often require highways' consent).

- conditions requiring compliance with other regulatory regimes will not meet the test of necessity and may not be relevant to planning.

- conditions requiring compliance with other regulatory regimes will not meet the test of necessity and may not be relevant to planning.

Other matters Public Footpath UM9

An application to make an order under Section 257 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 has been made to the council under reference WP/20/00372/FPD for the diversion of a public footpath UM9 From Irthlingborough Road, to the Junction with UM8 And UM10, Wellingborough, Northamptonshire and is before Planning Committee members for consideration.

The proposed diversion is necessary as a result of the proposed Primary School under this proposal. The application seeks to provide a new diverted route for the footpath which will be located to the east of the existing footpath route along part of a newly approved road for Stanton Cross known as 'Route 10 and allow the development pf parcels 13 and 36.

CONCLUSION The proposed development complies with the relevant development plan policies and is consistent with the provisions in the revised. In the absence of any material considerations of sufficient weight, it is recommended that the Reserved Matters be approved subject to conditions.

Planning Committee 33 of 131 3 February 2021

RECOMMENDATION Delegate to the Principal Planning Manager to approve subject to the following conditions and following the completion of a Deed of Variation to the original s106 Planning Agreement.

CONDITIONS/REASONS

1. The development hereby approved shall be carried out in accordance with the following drawings: Received 09 Nov 2020 PJT10078-MCA-ZZ-XX-DR-A-9001 Rev P02 - Location Plan PJT10078-MCA-ZZ-XX-DR-A-9005 Rev P02 - Proposed Site Sections PJT10078-MCA-ZZ-GF-DR-A-9006 Rev P01 Proposed Ground Floor Plan PJT10078-MCA-ZZ-01-DR-A-9007 Rev P01- Proposed First Floor Plan PJT10078-SMK-ZZ-XX-SP-ME-1102 Rev P01- Sustainable Design & Energy Statement PJT10078-MCA-ZZ-RF-DR-A-9008 Rev P01 - Proposed Roof Plan PJT10078-MCA-ZZ-XX-DR-A-9009 Rev P01- Proposed Elevations PJT10078-OTH-XX-XX-RP-SU-0010 Preliminary Ecological Appraisal Landscape Version 0.5 Landscape Rosetta Landscape Design - Landscape Management Specification dated 25/09/20 PJT10166-WML-ZZ-XX-DR-C-1001 Rev P06- Proposed Drainage Layout Services PJT10178-SMK-ZZ-XX-DR-ME-5001 Rev P01- Mechanical & Electrical Site External Services Layout PJT10078-SMK-ZZ-XX-DR-E-6301 Rev P04- External Lighting Layout PJT10078-MCA-ZZ-00-DR-A-9004 Rev P02 - Proposed Site Plan Received 08 Dec 2020 Drainage Strategy - Document ref: PJT10078-WML - ZZ-XX-RP-C-9001, Rev P01 Dated December 2020 Surface Water Drainage Calculations - Document ref. PJT10078-WML - ZZ-XX-CA- C-9001, Rev P01 dated December 2020 Received 18 Dec 2020 Security and Crime Prevention Strategy Statement (dated 22/12/20) Received 07 Jan 2021 Detailed Landscape Proposals (3650/1 Rev J)

Reason: To define the permission for the avoidance of doubt and in accordance with best practice guidance set out in paragraph 022 of the National Planning Practice Guidance.

2. No building or use hereby permitted shall be occupied or the use commenced until the vehicular access has been provided and thereafter retained at the position shown on the approved plans. Arrangement shall be made for surface water drainage to be intercepted and disposed of separately so that it does not discharge from or onto the highway carriageway.

Reason: In the interests of highway safety in accordance with policy 8 (b) (ii) of the North Northamptonshire Joint Core Strategy.

3. No building or use hereby permitted shall be occupied or the use commenced until

Planning Committee 34 of 131 3 February 2021

the car/vehicle parking area shown on the approved plans has been constructed, surfaced and permanently marked out. The car parking area so provided shall be maintained as a permanent ancillary to the development and shall be used for no other purpose thereafter.

Reason: To ensure adequate parking provision at all times so that the development does not prejudice the free flow of traffic or the safety on the neighbouring highway in accordance with policy 8 (b) (ii) of the North Northamptonshire Joint Core Strategy.

4. No building or use hereby permitted shall be occupied or the use commenced until the means of access for pedestrians and/or cyclists has/have been constructed in accordance with the approved plans. The means of access shall thereafter be retained for these purposes only.

Reason: In the interests of highway safety in accordance with policy 8 (b) (i) of the North Northamptonshire Joint Core Strategy.

5. In the event that unexpected contamination is found at any time when carrying out the development hereby approved, it must be reported immediately to the local planning authority. Development works at the site shall cease and an investigation and risk assessment undertaken to assess the nature and extent of the unexpected contamination. A written report of the findings shall be submitted to and approved by the local planning authority, together with a scheme to remediate, if required, prior to further development on site taking place. Only once written approval from the local planning authority has been given shall development works recommence.

Reason: To ensure that risks from land contamination to the future users of the land and neighbouring land are minimised in accordance with Policies 6 and 8 of the North Northamptonshire Joint Core Strategy.

6. No building or use hereby permitted shall be occupied or the use commenced until full details of any free standing CCTV columns and cameras or cameras fixed to the building including the location of each column or fixed camera and the extent of the area to be monitored has been submitted to and been approved in writing by the local planning authority. The approved details shall be implemented before the building is first brought into use.

Reason: To reduce the likelihood of crime, disorder and anti-social behaviour occurring in accordance with policy 8 (e) (vi) of the North Northamptonshire Joint Core Strategy.

7. The development hereby approved shall be carried out in accordance with the materials specified on the approved plans.

Reason: To ensure that the external appearance of the building is satisfactory and to not detract from the character and appearance of the area in accordance with policy 8 (d) (ii) of the North Northamptonshire Joint Core Strategy.

8. Notwithstanding the approved details, no development shall take place above slab level until details of the proposed boundary treatments have been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The details shall include a

Planning Committee 35 of 131 3 February 2021

boundary treatment plan (at a minimum scale of 1:500) detailing the position of all proposed boundary treatment and annotated or accompanied by a schedule specifying the type, height, composition, appearance and installation method of boundary treatment throughout the site. Development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details and thereafter retained in that form.

Reason: To provide adequate privacy, to protect the external character and appearance of the area and to minimise the effect of development on the area in accordance with policy 8 (e) (i) of the North Northamptonshire Joint Core Strategy.

9. The Mitigation and Compensation measures outlined in section 4 in the submitted Preliminary Ecological Appraisal by Blue Sky Design Services Ltd Document Ref: PJT10078-OTH-XX-XX-RP-SU-0010 shall be fully implemented prior to the first occupation of the use hereby permitted and shall thereafter be maintained and retained as approved. The bird and bat boxes are to be integral, self-cleaning and/or maintenance free models.

Reason: To minimise the impact of the development on the biodiversity of the area and to secure enhancements to the local ecological network in accordance with Paragraph 109 of the National Planning Policy Framework and policy 4 of the North Northamptonshire Joint Core Strategy.

10. No building or use herby permitted shall be occupied or the use commenced until the landscaping scheme has been completed in accordance with the approved plans, specifications and timetables unless a revised programme is agreed in writing with the local planning authority.

Reason: To protect the appearance and character of the area and to minimise the effect of development on the area in accordance with policy 3 (a), (b) and (e) of the North Northamptonshire Joint Core Strategy.

INFORMATIVE/S 1. In accordance with the provisions in the Town and Country Planning (Development Management Procedure) (England) Order 2015 and pursuant to paragraph 38 of the National Planning Policy Framework, where possible and feasible, either through discussions, negotiations or in the consideration and assessment of this application and the accompanying proposals, the council as the local planning authority endeavoured to work with the applicant/developer in a positive and proactive way to ensure that the approved development is consistent with the relevant provisions in the framework. 2. The Public Health Act 1875 Town Improvement Clauses Act 1847 at S.64. Prior to occupation of the newly created premises(s), the street numbering for this development or conversion - residential and commercial, must be agreed with the Street Naming and Numbering Officer. When issued, the number allocated must be clearly displayed on the outside of the property. Application forms for Street Naming and Numbering are available at www.wellingborough.gov.uk 3. To prepare for the increased demand for electric vehicles in future years appropriate infrastructure for electric vehicle charging points should be included within the development. 4. All gas fired boilers should meet a minimum standard of 40 mgNOx/Kwh.

Planning Committee 36 of 131 3 February 2021

5. The Borough Council of Wellingborough encourages all contractors to be 'considerate contractors' when working in our district by being aware of the needs of neighbours and the environment. Prior to the commencement of any site works, it is good practice to notify neighbouring occupiers of the nature and duration of works to be undertaken. To limit the potential detriment of construction works on residential amenity, it is recommended that all works and ancillary operations which are audible at the site boundary during construction should be carried out only between the following hours: 0800 hours and 1800 hours on Mondays to Fridays and 0800 and 1300 hours on Saturdays and at no time on Sundays and Bank Holidays. 6. Nothing herein shall be deemed to affect or vary the conditions imposed on outline planning permission WP/15/00605/VAR; dated 6 February 2017; which shall continue in full force and effect, in so far they are expressly varied by conditions hereby imposed.

Planning Committee 37 of 131 3 February 2021

BOROUGH COUNCIL OF WELLINGBOROUGH

Planning Committee 3 February 2021

Report of the Principal Planning Manager

Extension of time (if applicable):

Case Officer Debbie Kirk WP/20/00793/REM

Date received Date valid Overall Expiry Ward Parish 26 November 20 26 November 20 25 February 21 Harrowden & Sywell Gt Harrowden

Applicant Mr Mark Best

Agent Mr Greg Pearce

Location Site R10A Residential W North Niort Way Wellingborough Northamptonshire

Proposal Reserved matters application for 148 dwellings (47.3% affordable) on parcel R10a, Niort Way, Glenvale Park, Wellingborough pursuant to outline planning permission reference WP/16/00271/VAR for approval of access, appearance, landscaping, layout and scales including discharge of conditions 4(a) the layout, scale, appearance, access and landscaping; 4(b) vehicle, cycle and foot access routes and parking; 4(c) hard and soft landscaping including boundary treatments and details of street furniture and lighting; 4A(a) layout, design and specification of drainage infrastructure; 4A(b) detailed survey of existing ground level of the development and the finished floor levels of the buildings; 4A(c) waste management facilities strategy and waste collection receptacles; 5 (statement of compliance with design code); 6 (accordance with the planning application framework plan); 10 (structural landscape scheme); 11 (existing landscape features); 15 (construction management features); 16 (lighting strategy); 19 (foul water drainage); 20 (surface water drainage); 23 (sustainability statement); 27 (highway and access phasing); 31 (nationally described space standards); 32 (national accessibility standards); and 33 (water use limiting measures)

PLANNING HISTORY WP/16/00271/VAR Approved with conditions 15.03.2018 S73 application to vary conditions 1-20, 24-30, 32-33 and 37 of application reference number: WP/2012/0525/XEIA WP/18/00442/CND Part discharged 06.06.2019 Details submitted pursuant to conditions 5a (phasing programme), 9 (public rights of way), 11 (existing landscape features), 13 (archaeology), 15 (construction management plan), 16 (lighting

Planning Committee 38 of 131 3 February 2021

T ra c k ± 1 : S 3 c , 0 a 0 l e 0 : w

t T

h o W

h

e

I a t

i

h n C s r d

e

r m

T

B e

s d

a p

c S y p r a o

e l i e d s r

u

s v a c p c i e c e c d e c u

i a r s f a i t e

t A e d )

4

D

e f O A e r a d r n G i n a d a © e l

n t P d

C M C c a h i e t a r t o i a o

e p WP/20/00793/REM S t b w o s p

u ) a

g n i R r n s r

v a g C e e e p

v o y P r h e i

p g L 1 y a y h C 0 l r c e t 0 i

g o d 1 2 0 h p

9 0 1 t y 9 2

8 r 9 1 i 6 g . 9

h 4 t : .

L G e g e n N W d i o P r / t 2

W 0 / 0 a 0 y

7 W 9 3 e / l l R i n E g M b o

r S o i u t e g h R 1 0 A

R e s i d e n t i a l

W

N o r t h

1 . 2 2 m

R

H

strategy) 17 (Harrowden brook remodelling), 18 (Stage 2 Flood risk assessment), 24 (Low/zero carbon feasibility study) and 30 (walking and cycling audit) of planning permission ref: WP/16/00271/VAR - (part discharge of conditions 5a, 11, 13, 15, 16, 17 and 18) WP/19/00112/CND Part discharged 12.06.2019 Details submitted pursuant to condition 5 (design code - partial discharge in so far as it relates to Phase 1) of planning permission ref: WP/16/00271/VAR WP/19/00757/CND Part discharged 03.06.2020 Details submitted pursuant to condition 27 (partial discharge) (detailed development phasing plan for all highway and access works - Phase 1) of planning permission ref: WP/16/00271/VAR WP/20/00153/CND Part discharged 14.05.2020 Details submitted pursuant to condition 13 (programme of archaeological work) of planning permission ref: WP/16/00271/VAR relating to phase 1C and 1D (part discharge) WP/2012/0525 Approved with conditions 14.01.2013 Application for a new outline planning permission to replace an extant outline planning permission, in order to extend the time limit for implementation for Ref: WP/2008/0150/OEIA for up to 3000 dwellings, retail and commercial facilities, non-residential institutions (including primary schools and nurseries) a neighbourhood centre (comprising transport interchange, non- institutional and community facilities), open spaces and parkland, associated facilities and infrastructure (comprising utilities gas, electricity and water, sewerage and telecommunications and diversion to existing utilities where necessary) and a reserve corridor for the Isham-Wellingborough improvement (IWIMP). WP/2008/0150 Approved with conditions 23.02.2010 Outline proposal for: 3000 dwellings, retail and commercial facilities, non-residential institutions (including primary schools and nurseries) a neighbourhood centre (comprising transport interchange, non-institutional and community facilities), open spaces and parkland, associated facilities and infrastructure (comprising utilities gas, electricity and water, sewerage and telecommunications, and diversion to existing utilities where necessary) and a reserve corridor for the Isham-Wellingborough improvement. In accordance with the provisions in the Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) (England and Wales) Regulations 1999, an environmental impact assessment has been submitted with the application. This is an identical application/proposal to planning application WP/2007/0750/OEIA Allowed on appeal

Planning Committee 39 of 131 3 February 2021

Reason(s) for committee consideration

- The principal planning manager has requested the planning application is determined by committee

THE SITE AND SURROUNDINGS Parcel R10a is located on the western edge of phase 1. It is bound by parcel R10b immediately to the north, the Fitzhugh Rise primary street to the east, Beaumont Road primary street to the south and the land to the west is reserved for the proposed IWIMP. The application site was formerly used as agricultural land with one thin hedgerow with mature trees running east to west across the site.

The main spine roads off Niort Way and the strategic drainage/landscape infrastructure to serve phases 1 and 1A of the urban extension have been constructed. The primary streets to the east and south of the application site are under construction. To the south and east of the site parcels R1, R2 approved under reserved matters consent references WP/19/00137/REM and WP/20/00165/REM, parcels R5 and R6 approved under reserved matters consent reference WP/19/00380/REM are under construction. The application site will lie in close proximity to the westernmost area of the swales green infrastructure, which will provide direct pedestrian and cycle access to the recently approved primary school, community centre and pre-school under reserved matters consent reference WP/20/00099/REM.

BACKGROUND The application site is part of a wider development for a sustainable urban extension known as Glenvale Park, which includes up to 3000 dwellings, retail and commercial, non-residential institutions (nurseries and primary schools) and a neighbourhood centre (comprising a transport interchange, non-institutional and community facilities).

The original outline planning permission reference WP/2008/0150/OEIA was allowed on appeal and granted outline planning permission in February 2010. That application was renewed by outline planning permission reference WP/2012/0525/XEIA. Reserved matters consent reference WP/14/00480/REM was granted pursuant to conditions 1, 4, 4a, 11, 17, 18, 20 and 29 of outline planning permission WP/2012/0525/XEIA including details of phase 1a open space and landscaping and primary infrastructure, including junctions with Niort Way.

An application reference WP/16/00271/VAR made under section 73 for the variation of conditions 1-20, 24-30, 32-33 and 37 pursuant to the renewed outline planning permission WP/2012/0525/XEIA was granted permission on 15 March 2018 following the completion of a S106 legal agreement. This permission includes a revised framework plan containing a land swap between the local centre and a housing parcel and the addition of a care home. The revised framework plan for Glenvale Park relocates the local centre which includes a public house adjacent to Niort Way.

An application reference WP/19/00112/CND for approval of details reserved by condition 5 (a revised phase 1 design code for Glenvale Park) pursuant to the variation of planning permission reference WP/16/00271/VAR was granted a partial discharge of consent on 12 June 2019. To fully comply with this condition all future applications for

Planning Committee 40 of 131 3 February 2021

reserved matters consent in phase 1 need to be in accordance with the approved design code in addition design codes for phases 2 and 3 will need to be submitted and approved and all future applications for reserved matters consent in phases 2 and 3 will need to be in accordance with the approved design codes.

Reserved matters consent reference WP/16/00681/REM was granted on 18 July 2019 pursuant to conditions 4 (a) the layout, scale, appearance, access and landscaping 4 (b) vehicle, cycle and foot access routes and parking; 4 (c) hard and soft landscaping including boundary treatments for a proposed public house/restaurant with an ancillary first floor flat pursuant to variation to planning permission reference WP/16/00271/VAR.

Reserved matters consent reference number WP/19/00137/REM was granted on 22 August 2019 pursuant to conditions 4 (a) (the layout, scale, appearance, access and landscaping); 4 (b) vehicle, cycle and foot access routes and parking; 4 (c) hard and soft landscaping including boundary treatments and details of street furniture and lighting; 4 (A) (a) layout, design and specification of drainage infrastructure; 4 (a) (b) detailed survey of existing ground levels, details of any proposed alterations to existing ground levels, the final ground level of the development and the finished floor levels of the buildings; 4 (A) (c) waste management facilities strategy and waste audit, including arrangements for the provision of waste collection receptacles; 6 (accordance with the planning application development framework plan); 12 (landscape maintenance plan); 19 (foul water); 20 (surface water), 23 (sustainability statement/assessment); 31 (nationally described space standards) and 32 (national accessibility standards) of variation to planning permission reference WP/16/00271/VAR for 199 dwellings. This consent has been implemented and BDW Trading started on site in July 2020;

Reserved matters consent reference number WP/17/00377/REM was granted on 19 September 2019 pursuant to conditions 4 (a) (the layout, scale, appearance, access and landscaping); 4 (b) vehicle, cycle and foot access routes and parking; 4 (c) hard and soft landscaping including boundary treatments; 4 (A) (a) layout, design and specification of drainage infrastructure; 4 (a) (b) detailed survey of existing ground levels, details of any proposed alterations to existing ground levels, the final ground level of the development and the finished floor levels of the buildings; 4 (A) (c) waste management facilities strategy and waste audit, including arrangements for the provision of waste collection receptacles; 20 (scheme for disposal of surface water) of variation to planning permission reference WP/16/00271/VAR for a 66 bedroom care home for older persons.

Reserved matters consent reference WP/19/00630/REM was granted on 9 December 2019 pursuant to conditions 4 (a) (the layout, scale, appearance, access and landscaping); 6 (accordance with the planning application development framework plan) to variation to planning permission reference WP/16/00271/VAR for 3 no. proposed substations within phase 1a+b at Glenvale Park (Wellingborough North).

Reserved matters consent reference WP/18/00188/REM was granted on 19 December 2019 pursuant to WP/16/00271/VAR, specifically conditions 4 (a) (the layout, scale, appearance, access and landscaping); 4 (b) vehicle, cycle and foot access routes and parking; 4 (A) (a) layout, design and specification of drainage infrastructure; 6 (accordance with the planning application development framework plan); 10 (structural landscape scheme); 12 (Landscape Maintenance Plan); 19 (foul water drainage); 20

Planning Committee 41 of 131 3 February 2021

(surface water drainage); 27 (highway and access works), to determine access and landscaping for the area known as Phase 1b infrastructure and open space at Glenvale Park (Wellingborough North) - Additional information and amended plans (Part retrospective) pursuant to WP/16/00271/VAR, specifically conditions 4 (a) (the layout, scale, appearance, access and landscaping); 4 (b) vehicle, cycle and foot access routes and parking; 4 (A) (a) layout, design and specification of drainage infrastructure; 6 (accordance with the planning application development framework plan); 10 (structural landscape scheme); 12 (Landscape Maintenance Plan); 19 (foul water drainage); 20 (surface water drainage); 27 (highway and access works), to determine access and landscaping for the area known as Phase 1b infrastructure and open space at Glenvale Park (Wellingborough North) - Additional information and amended plans (part retrospective). This consent has been implemented and the road and drainage infrastructure completed.

Reserved matters consent reference WP/19/00380/REM was granted on 20 February 2020 pursuant to conditions 4(a) the layout, scale, appearance, access and landscaping; 4(b) vehicle, cycle and foot access routes and parking; 4(c) hard and soft landscaping including boundary treatments and details of street furniture and lighting; 4 (A) (a) layout, design and specification of drainage infrastructure; 4 (A) (b) detailed survey of existing ground levels, details of any proposed alterations to existing ground levels, the final ground level of the development and the finished floor levels of the buildings; 4 (A) (c) waste management facilities strategy and waste audit, including arrangements for the provision of waste collection receptacles; 5 (statement of compliance with the design code; 12 (Landscape maintenance plan); 14 (Noise mitigation measures) and 23 (sustainability statement/assessment) of variation to planning permission reference WP/16/00271/VAR for the erection of 261 dwellings on parcels R5 & R6 of Phase 1 Glenvale Park. Taylor Wimpey commenced implementing this consent in August 2020.

Reserved matters consent reference WP/19/00706/REM was granted on 19 February 2020 pursuant to WP/16/00271/VAR, specifically conditions 4 (a) (the layout, scale, appearance, access and landscaping); 4 (b) vehicle, cycle and foot access routes and parking; 4 (A) (a) layout, design and specification of drainage infrastructure; 6 (accordance with the planning application development framework plan); 10 (structural landscape scheme); 11 (existing landscape features); 12 (Landscape Maintenance Plan); 15 (Construction Management Plan); 16 (Lighting Strategy); 19 (foul water drainage); 20 (surface water drainage); 27 (highway and access works), to determine access and landscaping for the area known as Phase 1c infrastructure and open space at Glenvale Park serving parcels R8a and R8b. This consent is currently being implemented.

Reserved matters consent reference WP/19/00758/REM was granted on 18 March 2020 pursuant to WP/16/00271/VAR, specifically conditions 4 (a) (the layout, scale, appearance, access and landscaping); 4 (b) vehicle, cycle and foot access routes and parking; 4 (A) (a) layout, design and specification of drainage infrastructure; 6 (accordance with the planning application development framework plan); 10 (structural landscape scheme); 11 (existing landscape features); 12 (Landscape Maintenance Plan); 15 (Construction Management Plan); 16 (Lighting Strategy); 19 (foul water drainage); 20 (surface water drainage); 27 (highway and access works), to determine access and landscaping for the area known as RMA 2 infrastructure and open space at Glenvale Park serving parcels R7 and R9.

Planning Committee 42 of 131 3 February 2021

A Reserved matters consent reference WP/17/00525/REM was granted on 11 June 2020 pursuant to conditions 4 (a) (the layout, scale, appearance, access and landscaping); 4 (b) vehicle, cycle and foot access routes and parking; 4 (c) hard and soft landscaping including boundary treatments and details of street furniture and lighting; 4 (A) (a) layout, design and specification of drainage infrastructure; 4 (a) (b) detailed survey of existing ground levels, details of any proposed alterations to existing ground levels, the final ground level of the development and the finished floor levels of the buildings; 4 (A) (c) waste management facilities strategy and waste audit, including arrangements for the provision of waste collection receptacles; 6 (accordance with the planning application development framework plan); 31 (nationally described space standards) and 32 (national accessibility standards) of planning application WP/16/00271/VAR for 40 dwellings - amended description and plans + design code compliance and access statement.

Reserved matters consent reference WP/20/0099/REM was granted on 11 June 2020 pursuant to WP/16/00271/VAR, specifically conditions 4 (a) (the layout, scale, appearance, access and landscaping); 4 (b) vehicle, cycle and foot access routes and parking; 4 (c) hard and soft landscaping including boundary treatments and details of street furniture and lighting; 4 (d) layout and design of public open space; 4A (a) layout, design and specification of drainage infrastructure; 4A (c) waste management facilities strategy and waste audit, including arrangements for the provision of waste collection receptacles; 6 (accordance with the planning application development framework plan); 10 (structural landscape scheme); 19 (foul water drainage); 20 (surface water drainage); 23 (sustainability statement/assessment), for proposed primary school, community centre, nursery and local children's play area (separate to the play provided as part of the primary school), comprising vehicular parking, hard and soft landscaping, and areas of hard and soft play, at Glenvale Park (Wellingborough North).

A reserved matters consent reference WP/20/00100/ REM was granted on 11 June 2020 pursuant to WP/16/00271/VAR, specifically conditions 4 (a) (the layout, scale, appearance, access and landscaping); 4 (b) vehicle, cycle and foot access routes and parking; 4 (c) hard and soft landscaping including boundary treatments; 4 (d) layout and design of public open space; 4A (a) layout, design and specification of drainage infrastructure; 4A (c) waste management facilities strategy and waste audit, including arrangements for the provision of waste collection receptacles; 6 (accordance with the planning application development framework plan); 10 (structural landscape scheme); 19 (foul water drainage); 20 (surface water drainage); 23 (sustainability statement/assessment), for proposed local centre, comprising 968 m2 of Use Class A1 (food retail and commercial units), 162 m2 of Use Class A3 (food and drink unit), 5 no. apartments of Use Class C3, and 538 m2 of Use Class D2 (gym) with associated parking, landscape works, at Glenvale Park (Wellingborough North).

Reserved matters consent reference WP/20/00165/REM was granted on 13 August 2020 for 49 dwellings on parcel R2, Niort Way, Glenvale Park Wellingborough pursuant to variation to planning permission WP/16/00271/VAR for approval of access, appearance, landscaping, layout and scale including discharge of conditions 4 (a) (the layout, scale, appearance, access and landscaping); 4 (b) vehicle, cycle and foot access routes and parking; 4 (c) hard and soft landscaping including boundary treatments and details of street furniture and lighting; 4 (A) (a) layout, design and specification of drainage infrastructure (foul drainage only); 4 (a) (b) detailed survey of

Planning Committee 43 of 131 3 February 2021

existing ground levels, details of any proposed alterations to existing ground levels, the final ground level of the development and the finished floor levels of the buildings; 4 (A) (c) waste management facilities strategy and waste audit, including arrangements for the provision of waste collection receptacles; 6 (accordance with the planning application development framework plan); 12 (landscape maintenance plan); 19 (foul water); 23 (sustainability statement/assessment); 31 (nationally described space standards) and 32 (national accessibility standards) to variation to planning permission WP/16/00271/VAR.

A reserved matters application reference WP/20/00377/REM was granted on 8 October 2020 for 238 dwellings on parcels R8a and R8b, Niort Way, Glenvale Park, Wellingborough pursuant to outline planning permission reference WP/16/00271/VAR for approval of access, appearance, landscaping, layout and scales including discharge of conditions 4 (a) the layout, scale, appearance, access and landscaping; 4(b) vehicle, cycle and foot access routes and parking; 4 (c) hard and soft landscaping including boundary treatments and details of street furniture and lighting; 4 (d) layout and design of public open space; 4 A (b) detailed survey of existing ground level of the development and the finished floor levels of the buildings; 4 A (c) waste management facilities strategy and waste collection receptacles; 5 (statement of compliance with design code); 6 (accordance with the planning application framework plan); 10 (structural landscape scheme); 31 (nationally described space standards) and 32 (national accessibility standards).

A reserved matters application reference WP/20/00503/REM was granted on 3 December 2020 for access for construction traffic on a temporary basis from the A509 adjacent to parcels R8a and R8b of Glenvale Park, Wellingborough pursuant to WP/16/00271/VAR, specifically conditions 4 (a) (the layout, scale, appearance, access and landscaping) and 15 (Construction Management Plan).

A reserved matters application reference WP/20/00811/REM is pending consideration for 210 units on Parcel R7 of the Glenvale Park Development including discharge of conditions 4 (A) (the layout, scale and appearance); 4 (b) (vehicle, cycle and foot access routes), 4 (c) (hard and soft landscaping including boundary treatments), 6 (development framework plan), 23 (sustainability statement), 31( national space standards) and 32 (national accessibility standards) and 33 (measures to limit water use) of variation to planning permission reference WP/16/00271/VAR.

To inform the reserved matters submission a series of pre -application meetings were held with the an assigned senior development management officer and key consultees which included Northamptonshire police, Northamptonshire highways, a principal urban design consultant, a senior landscape consultant, the council's landscape officer, the council's environmental protection officer and the council's housing officer. Detailed written responses (reference PRE/19/00117/PREF) were provided after each meeting dated 20 December 2019, 20 February 2020 and 22 May 2020 and can be viewed on the current reserved matters application case file.

Please note a pre-application enquiry reference PRE/20/00111/PREF has been recently received and is under consideration by officers for 144 dwellings including layout, scale, appearance and landscaping on parcel R10b Glenvale Park and expansion of the site boundary on parcel R10b.

Planning Committee 44 of 131 3 February 2021

APPLICATION PROPOSAL This amended application seeks reserved matters consent for 148 dwellings (47.3% affordable) on parcel R10a, Niort Way, Glenvale Park, Wellingborough pursuant to outline planning permission reference WP/16/00271/VAR for approval of access, appearance, landscaping, layout and scales including discharge of conditions 4(a) the layout, scale, appearance, access and landscaping; 4(b) vehicle, cycle and foot access routes and parking; 4(c) hard and soft landscaping including boundary treatments and details of street furniture and lighting; 4A(a) layout, design and specification of drainage infrastructure; 4A(b) detailed survey of existing ground level of the development and the finished floor levels of the buildings; 4A(c) waste management facilities strategy and waste collection receptacles; 5 (statement of compliance with design code); 6 (accordance with the planning application framework plan); 10 (structural landscape scheme); 11 (existing landscape features); 15 (construction management features); 16 (lighting strategy); 19 (foul water drainage); 20 (surface water drainage); 23 (sustainability statement); 27 (highway and access phasing); 31 (nationally described space standards); 32 (national accessibility standards); and 33 (water use limiting measures).

For the avoidance of doubt, the applicant has agreed in writing that the description of development has been updated to reflect a slight increase in the provision of affordable housing across the parcel, which has increased from the originally proposed 45% to 47.3%.

The amended application was accompanied by a planning statement, a design and access statement including a compliance statement, a noise impact assessment, a surface water drainage and flood risk report, a sustainability statement, an affordable housing statement, a construction environmental management plan (CEMP), an arboricultural impact assessment and a lighting strategy.

This application seeks approval of 148 dwellings consisting of 16 one -bedroom apartments, 6 two -bedroom apartments, 1 two -bedroom flat over garages (FOG), 54 two -bedroom houses, 65 three -bedroom houses and 6 four -bedroom houses.

The scheme includes the provision of 47.3% affordable housing consisting of 35 affordable rent dwellings and 35 shared ownership dwellings.

The affordable rent dwellings would consist of 5 one -bedroom apartments, 3 two - bedroom apartments, 14 two -bedroom houses, 11 three -bedroom houses and 2 four - bedroom houses.

The shared ownership dwellings would consist of 1 two -bedroom flat over garages (FOG), 17 two -bedroom houses and 17 three -bedroom houses.

The scheme includes 20% CAT M (4)2 and no CAT M (4)3 dwellings. All proposed house types would meet the Nationally Described Space Standards.

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT As the original outline planning application and variation of condition applications were EIA development, this application is regarded as a subsequent EIA application. Under the Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) Regulations 2017

Planning Committee 45 of 131 3 February 2021

subsequent EIA applications including reserved matter applications and applications requiring approval before development can commence eg approval of conditions. As part of the requirements therefore, the process of screening must be carried out.

It is considered that the proposed development as described by the applicant is a subsequent EIA application but that the original EIA submitted with the outline planning application and update environmental statement submitted with the subsequent variation of condition applications adequately addresses the environmental effects of the proposal. Therefore in accordance with Regulation 9 (2) of the EIA 2017 Regulations, where the environmental information already before a local planning authority is considered to be adequate to assess the environmental effects of a development, that information shall be taken into consideration in the determination of a subsequent application.

As such the original environmental statement and update information has therefore been taken into account and it is considered that no further information is required in order to assess the environmental effects of the development.

NATIONAL GUIDANCE, DEVELOPMENT PLAN POLICY AND SUPPLEMENTARY PLANNING DOCUMENTS/GUIDANCE National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) (19 February 2019) Planning Practice Guidance (PPG) National Design Guide (PPG) (September 2019)

North Northamptonshire Joint Core Strategy - Part 1 of the local plan (JCS) Policies: 1 (presumption in favour of sustainable development) 2 (historic environment) 3 (landscape character) 4 (biodiversity and geodiversity) 5 (water environment, resources and flood risk management) 6 (development on brownfield land and land affected by contamination) 8 (North Northamptonshire place shaping principles) 9 (sustainable buildings and allowable solutions) 11 (network of urban and rural areas) 28 (housing requirements and strategic opportunities) 29 (distribution of new homes) 30 (housing mix and tenure)

Plan for the Borough of Wellingborough - Part 2 of the local plan (PBW) Policies H1 (urban housing allocations) Site 2 (Wellingborough north)

Supplementary planning documents/guidance: Sustainable Design Biodiversity Trees on Development Sites Planning Out Crime in Northamptonshire Parking

Planning Committee 46 of 131 3 February 2021

SUMMARY OF REPLIES TO CONSULTATIONS/REPRESENTATIONS RECEIVED 1. Northamptonshire Highways - recommends the amended plans meet with the requirements of the local highway authority but to partially discharge conditions 4 (b) and 16 of variation to planning permission reference WP/16/00271/VAR a copy of technical approval from the local highway authority is required. Conditions should be imposed requiring details full engineering, drainage, street lighting and constructional details of the streets proposed for adoption; no dwelling or dwellings shall be occupied until the street(s) affording access to those dwelling(s) has been completed to wearing course and details of the proposed arrangements for future management and maintenance of the proposed streets within the development. The revised construction environmental management plan (CEMP) and the construction traffic management plan are noted and the partial discharge of conditions 15 and 27 of variation to planning permission reference WP/16/00271/VAR is recommended.

2. The council's environmental protection officer (contamination) - has no objections to make on this application in relation to land contamination. However, a condition is recommended to be imposed on any consent in the event of any unexpected contamination being discovered during the course of any construction works.

3. The Commission for Darker Skies (CDFS) - comments are based upon the street lighting layout document drawing 47831/2001/1300/001 REV A. CFDS notes that the proposed lighting is to be adopted by the local highway authority and is to be dimmed to 60% from 22:00 to 06:00. As a result, CFDS does not consider this proposed lighting will generate any significant energy waste from glare or light pollution due to the scheme being required to meet LA PFI specifications on column locations, spacing and lighting apparatus design.

4. Anglian Water (AW) - Foul Water - AW have reviewed the applicants submitted foul drainage strategy and consider that the impacts on the public foul sewerage network are acceptable. Anglian water at this stage can therefore recommend the partial discharge of condition 19 of variation to planning permission reference WP/16/00271/VAR.

Surface Water - AW have reviewed the applicant's submitted surface water drainage information (Drainage Strategy) and consider that the impacts on AW public surface water sewerage network are acceptable and recommend the partial discharge of condition 20 of the outline planning application WP/16/00271/VAR.

5. Environment Agency - no objection to this application.

6. The Ramblers - recommends the site does not affect a public right of way. The Ramblers note that the site will be in "close proximity" to green infrastructure (Planning statement page 8). Residents should be informed of pedestrian and cycling infrastructure giving access to local amenities, schools and areas of informal open space in the interests of sustainable living, transport and informal recreation. Local recreation is also desirable to relieve pressure on the Nene Valley SSSI and on Country Parks.

7. The council's environmental protection officer - noise and lighting - commented on conditions 4(a), 15 and 16 of variation to planning permission reference

Planning Committee 47 of 131 3 February 2021

WP/16/00271/VAR as the other conditions do not appear to require an input from this team. Condition 4(a) - (Layout, scale, appearance, access and landscaping) - there are no comments regarding this condition.

Condition 15 - (Construction Environmental Management) - the originally submitted construction environmental management plan outlines the general arrangements for the management of dust and noise emissions from the construction works, however, it is made clear that this is only an overview and it is stated that:

"The Contractor will prepare Specific Method Statements detailing how they plan to implement the construction management procedures, detailed in this Construction Environmental Management Plan and shall take into account the philosophy promoted by the CEMP". Therefore, it is the council's environmental protection officers view that the CEMP is not complete at this stage and that we cannot support discharging condition 15 until the specific method statements are submitted for approval.

Please note: The council's environmental protection officer has been re-consulted on the amended CEMP Rev A and any comments received including any additional conditions will be set out in the late papers.

Condition - 16 (lighting strategy) - the submitted lighting strategy deals primarily with the design of street lighting for the development. Nuisance from construction phase lighting requirements is also discussed, however, it is stated that "… these potential impacts will be managed in the Construction Environmental Management Plan". Environmental protection will comment on the detailed CEMP when it is submitted for approval and has no comments to make regarding the proposed street lighting strategy.

Please note: The council's environmental protection officer has been re-consulted on the amended CEMP Rev A and any comments received including any additional conditions will be set out in the late papers.

Effects from future traffic noise: Subject to the imposition of a condition requiring the environmental noise impact assessment to be reviewed and a report assuming that traffic noise mitigation is provided as part of the proposed IWIMP road scheme. The report shall include proposals to mitigate any observed adverse effects due to noise on the health and quality of life of the future residents. If it is found that it will be necessary to rely on closed windows to achieve satisfactory internal noise levels, then an assessment of the risk of overheating together with proposals for providing adequate cooling ventilation should also be submitted for approval.

8. Northamptonshire principal project officer (ecology) - recommends that the close-board fences on the boundary plan drawing number GPWEL-MCB-ZZ-ZZ-DR-A- 0231 rev D5-P2 to include hedgehog holes to allow hedgehogs to forage among the gardens, which will also deliver a measure of pest control for residents.

9. Northamptonshire assistant archaeological advisor advises that archaeological evaluation has taken place within this area and no mitigation was required.

10. Northamptonshire local lead flood authority - recommends there is sufficient information to partially discharge condition 20, in respect of parcel 10a, of variation to planning permission reference WP/16/00271/VAR to which this application refers and can confirm surface water drainage has been addressed.

Planning Committee 48 of 131 3 February 2021

11. the council's landscape officer - has no objections to the landscape proposals and it has obviously not been possible to retain any of the existing hedgerow which includes an ash tree within the site layout. The specification for tree planting adjacent to paved areas satisfactorily addresses the concern for minimising damage from tree roots. It is important that it is adhered to. Responsibility for the maintenance of some areas in front of buildings does not appear to be obvious and this needs to be made clear. There are a number of hedges which will need regular maintenance and the Berberis which is a dominant feature is very prickly. There are three grass areas within the highway to be adopted and it is to be hoped that this will not become an issue at the adoption stage.

12. Northamptonshire Police - recommends subject to the imposition of conditions requiring details of lighting to be provided to unadoptable areas; and details and design of the balconies proposed serving plots 1-22 inclusive having regard for crime prevention and 'Secured by Design' principles, the proposed development would comply with policy 8 (e) (vi) and (ii) of the JCS.

13. Great Harrowden Parish Council - no comments received.

14. Neighbours - no comments received.

ASSESSMENT AND REASONED JUSTIFICATION The proposal raises the following main issues:

- conformity with the development plan and material considerations; - design, layout and the effect on the character and appearance of the surrounding area; - effect on landscape visual amenity; - effect on archaeology; - effect on flood risk and surface water drainage; - effect on foul sewage; - effect on noise: - noise on air quality; - effect on biodiversity; - housing mix, compliance with national space standard, national accessibility standards and affordable; - effect/impact on the living conditions of the neighbouring occupiers and the future occupiers of the development; - effect/impact on highway safety in relation to the proposed access arrangement and parking provision; - contamination; - crime and disorder; - conditions

Conformity with the development plan and material considerations Section 38(6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 states that "If regard is to be had to the development plan for the purposes of any determination to be made under the Planning Acts, the determination must be made in accordance with the development plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise".

Planning Committee 49 of 131 3 February 2021

In addition to the specific NPPF requirements set out above, paragraph 128 states that 'applicants will be expected to work closely with those affected by their proposals to evolve designs that take account of the views of the community. Applications that can demonstrate early, proactive and effective engagement with the community should be looked on more favourably'.

The application form at question five indicates that pre-application advice and assistance has been sought from the council. The NPPF from paragraph 41 extols the virtues of applicants engaging in pre application discussion with the council to resolve any issues that may arise to help applicants avoid any unnecessary delays and costs.

Policy 1 of the JCS is clear that when considering development proposals, the local planning authority will take a positive approach that reflects the presumption in favour of sustainable development as set out within the revised NPPF.

Policy Site 2 of the PBW sets out development principles for the Wellingborough North SUE. Criterion E seeks a mixture of housing types, sizes and tenures including specialist housing to meet the needs for older persons, accessible housing, starter housing and self-build.

Policy 29 of the JCS seeks new housing to be accommodated in line with the spatial strategy with a strong focus at the Growth Towns as the most sustainable locations for development followed by the market towns as set out on table 5 (page 137) of the JCS.

Condition 6 of the variation to planning permission reference WP/16/00271/VAR requires each reserved matter application to substantially accord with the development framework plan (drawing numbered BBD008/010/BH received on 21 July 2016 and be accompanied by a written statement which demonstrates compliance.

The proposed use of the site will comprise of a use falling within use classes C3 as defined by the Town and Country Planning (Use Classes) (Amendment) (England) Regulations 2020 - dwelling houses.

The principle of the development of the application site with 148 dwellings has been established through the revised development framework plan for the sustainable urban extension under the varied outline planning permission reference WP/16/0271/VAR and would be in accordance with policies 28 and 29 of the JCS and site 2 (E) of the PBW. The proposed development would assist in the delivery of the council's 5 -year housing land supply and deliver 148 dwellings in the Glenvale Park SUE.

The principle of the development of the site for the development of 148 units would accord policies 28 and 29 of the JCS, policy 2 (E) of PBW and with condition 6 of the variation of outline planning permission reference WP/16/00271/VAR.

However, the acceptability of the scheme would be dependent on compliance with other detailed planning policies and material considerations discussed in detail below:

Design, layout and the effect on the character and appearance of the surrounding area JCS at policy 8 (d) (i) and (ii) describes the principles that proposed development must take into account with regards to its effect on the character and appearance of an area.

Planning Committee 50 of 131 3 February 2021

The government at paragraph 127 (a) - (d) of the revised NPPF attach great importance to the design of built development. It goes on to advise that planning decisions should ensure that development will function well and add quality of the overall area; not just for the short term but over the life time of a development; are visually attractive as a result of good architecture, layout and appropriate and effective landscaping; are sympathetic to local character and history, including the built environment and landscape setting, while not discouraging appropriate innovation and change; establish or maintain a strong sense of place, using the arrangements of streets, space, building types and materials to create attractive, welcoming and distinctive places to live, work and visit.

The National Design Guide, illustrates how well-designed places that are beautiful, enduring and successful can be achieved in practice. It forms part of the Government's collection of planning practice guidance and should be read alongside the separate planning practice guidance on design process and tools.

Condition 4(a) of variation to planning permission WP/16/00271/VAR requires details of the layout, the scale and appearance.

Section 2.5 of the phase 1 design code provides guidance and design parameters for residential development including built form, block typology, house types, colour and material strategy.

This application comprises the provision of 148 dwellings on parcel 10a in phase 1. Reserved matters approval is sought for access, appearance, landscaping, layout, scale. The development on Glenvale Park should be of a contemporary design and reflect the design aspirations shown on page 27 of the design code.

Appearance It is considered by the senior urban design consultant that the house types proposed reflect the code and character of the parcels being taken forward. The proposed elevational appearance of the dwellings across parcel R10a would be of a contemporary design to fit in with the approved appearance of the housing on parcels R1, R2, R4b, R5, R6, R8a and R8B.

The proposed external materials to be used are detailed on the amended external materials plan with a schedule setting out the material type and colour to be used across the sites. The external facing brick would consist of one shade of red/brown brick stock and two shades of buff stock brick. The dwellings would consist of contrasting brick detailing applied on the ground floor and grey UPVC external windows the across the site and unifying with the appearance of the approved housing on parcels R1, R2, R5 and R6.

The overall appearance of the site has been designed in three distinct zones consisting of:

The frontage onto Fitzhugh Rise primary route will include marker buildings at focal points and key junctions. The buildings have been massed in terms of rooflines to respond to the steep topography of the site. A built form with a strong percentage of enclosure to the street and minimal gaps. The typology of the units primarily consists of terraced, semi-detached and apartments. The units are largely two and two and a half

Planning Committee 51 of 131 3 February 2021

storeys along the Fitzhugh Rise with three storey apartment blocks on the corner of Fitzhugh Rise and Beaumont Road. The frontage and key side elevations of the units consist of buff brick bases with grey engineering bricks and with coloured window frames.

The public open space frontage comprises of dwellings along the crescent facing the public open space located on the north east corner of the site. These dwellings are positively arranged with a strong frontage to this edge with a slightly looser form containing a mixture of detached and semi-detached dwellings, predominantly two storeys. The proposed dwellings will have clean and contemporary lines with wide fenestrations and contrasting brick detailing to the edges of the elevation with the addition of a projected bond brick pattern in key locations to provide a unique identity to the area. All the dwellings in this zone will have grey UPVC windows.

The neighbourhood zone features a range of influences including mews, residential streets and cul de sacs. These dwellings are arranged with appropriate street enclosure and termination of views within the design. The dwellings are predominantly two storey semi-detached and terraced with some detached. The frontage and key side elevations of these units consist of a mixture of buff and red brick with horizontal brick detailing and contain grey windows.

The senior urban design consultant noted that balconies have been included to all apartment blocks, which would form private amenity space (25m2) for each apartment.

The senior urban design consultant in relation to boundary treatments to parking courts noted, the majority, of the boundary treatments have been addressed. However, the senior urban design consultant noted that the boundary treatment to unit 23 and parking spaces 19 to 21 remain as closed boundary timber fencing. These changes need addressing to be finished in a brick to both match the northern approach and to ensure durability considering the proximity of the parking spaces. The applicant has submitted an amended external materials boundary treatment plan (reference GPWEL MCB ZZ ZZ DR A 0231 D5 Rev P3) showing the boundary treatment to unit 23 and parking spaces 19-21 being finished in brick.

The senior urban design consultant in relation to secondary street material noted a block paver has been proposed where the finish is stated as to be confirmed. It is considered the finish to the block pavers needs to contrast to that of the house units to ensure there is not a consistent tone across the street and house elevations. This can create a very monotonous environment dominated by brick. Alternatively, other paver units can be used to provide the contrast on top of the change in colour. The applicant has asked if a condition could be imposed on any reserved matters consent requiring samples of the two different types of block pavers to be used be submitted and approved by the local planning authority as they are not known at this stage.

The senior urban design consultant noted units 45-77 have been maintained continuous frontages. It is appreciated that the highway provides some change in drawing out the front spaces to the units the vertical element of the units on the continuous run will provide an over dominant repetition to this environment. It is considered a further review in either creating this variety in the frontages or more work to the street to create breaks in the vertical views using extensive tree planting and landscaping. The applicant's agent has advised that they consider this strong linear approach of this

Planning Committee 52 of 131 3 February 2021

frontage is appropriate set against the context of this contemporary/orthogonally planned layout, and in particular, as a direct response to the boundary itself. In the style of traditional terraced Edwardian streets with often strong lines and rhythmic forms, they can be very attractive. Furthermore, when viewed more widely from the open land to the north west (and future IWIMP route) this is a cleaner offset from the boundary (creating a layer of development) will appear more balanced.

The senior urban design consultant in relation to building materials previously commented at the pre-application enquiry stage that the predominate building material and colour, offered little variation. A material plan should be issued which outlined the approach to materials through the parcel. The materials palette appears to be a consistent approach to a small palette of materials which runs the risk of creating a monotonous character. The applicant's agent advises that an external materials plan has been included in the submission pack. This has been developed in accordance with the Design Code specification for the "Middle Glenvale" character area. The majority of the proposed plots are to be in buff brick plotted in two different typologies to provide variety across the site, with the remainder plotted in red brick to echo the main materials of the Lower Glenvale character area. On other previously approved parcels only two typologies of the main materials were used and therefore the applicant considers that the current brick choice associated with three different architectural elevation styles provides enough variety across the site.

In relation to block T1B &T2 the senior urban design consultant previously highlighted that the location of a bin store to the main elevation would detract from the quality of the build. Is there an opportunity to provide the bin store to the rear courtyard where the cycle store can be located on the main frontage? The applicant agent has confirmed that from the original proposal discussed at the pre-application stage, the bins store have been relocated in the courtyard retaining an accessible position for the waste collection crew. The other bin store serving plots 12-22 is included within the design of the ground floor for the block T1B.

No neighbour objections have been received in relation to the proposed appearance of the overall housing development.

Subject to a condition requiring material samples (see condition 7 below) to be provided the appearance of the proposed housing development on parcel 10a is considered to be appropriate and in accordance with policy 8 (d) (i) and (ii) of the JCS, the parameters set out in the design code in relation to appearance and condition 4 (a) (appearance) of the variation to outline planning permission reference WP/16/00271/VAR.

Layout The layout of parcel R10a has been informed by figure 9 the regulatory plan in the design code for phase 1 (page 15) which identifies key corners and gateways requiring built form emphasis, the main access points to the development, local side street junctions, open spaces abutting the site boundaries, existing landscape features.

The layout has been arranged in a series of perimeter blocks which positively addresses all open frontages to the site and provides natural surveillance of the footways and streets. Where dwellings front onto two highways they have been designed to have dual frontages with ground floor habitable rooms fronting and siding onto streets. Each dwelling will have dedicated allocated parking and 40 unallocated

Planning Committee 53 of 131 3 February 2021

visitor spaces have been provided in dedicated bays throughout the site. The boundaries to each dwelling will be enclosed by 1.8 metre high close boarded fencing, however where boundaries front directly onto highways/communal parking spaces these will be enclosed by 1.8 metre screen walls. The applicant has provided appropriate buildings on key corners and gateways as set out in the design code.

The site layout plan is considered by the principal urban designer for JPDU to be acceptable and in accordance with the guidance and parameters set out in the design code.

No neighbour objections have been received in relation to the amended proposed layout of the development.

The layout of the site and dwellings are considered to be appropriate and in accordance with policy 8 (d) (i) and (ii) of the JCS, the parameters set out in the design code in relation to layout and condition 4 (a) (layout) of outline planning permission reference WP/16/00271/VAR.

Scale The scale of the proposed dwellings would be predominantly 2 storeys with occasional 2.5 storey dwellings and two 3 storey landmark buildings. The proposed three storey apartment blocks will be on the southern part of parcel R10a fronting onto Beaumont Road to the south and Fitzhugh Rise to the east.

The scale of development accords with the parameters set out in the design code which allows a range of buildings with a scale of two, two and a half and three storeys.

The scale of the proposed buildings would ensure that the development would complement the approved residential development sites to the south and east. The use of gable fronted dwellings, horizontal brick detailing to articulate the key elevations and varied materials would assist in breaking up the overall massing of the buildings and add interest to the external form and appearance of the overall proposed housing development.

No neighbour objections have been received in relation to the amended proposed scale of the development.

The overall scale of the proposal complies with the parameters for the scale of the neighbourhood centre set out in the design code and the details related to scale are therefore considered to be acceptable and accord with policy 8 (d) (i) and (ii) of the JCS, the parameters set out in the design code in relation to layout and condition 4(a) (scale) of variation to outline planning permission reference WP/16/00271/VAR.

Landscaping Policy 3 (a), (b) and (e) of the JCS states that development should be located and designed in a way that is sensitive to its landscape setting retaining and where possible enhancing the distinctive qualities of the landscape character area which it would affect.

Policy Site 2 (H) of the PBW requires a significant multi-functional greenspace network, retaining where possible existing landscape features. It is recognised that the overall green infrastructure network has been agreed and is to be provided outside of the

Planning Committee 54 of 131 3 February 2021

boundaries of this application. Regard however should be paid to ensuring reasonable access to this open space.

Condition 4(c) of variation to planning permission WP/16/00271/VAR requires details of hard and soft landscaping including boundary treatments and lighting.

The landscape consultant welcomes the use of planting species that align with the approved design code. However, before any reserved matters approval is considered the landscape consultant would recommend the following recommendations are taken into consideration:

- It should be demonstrated that all gardens meet the 50m2 minimum / 100m2 ideal standard. This has been checked and some minor amendments to the layout has been made to ensure the gardens of plots 43, 61, 67, 109, 116 and 146 meet the minimum of 50m2.

- The proposed material treatment for areas of parking to the frontage of properties along the Fitzhugh Rise and within parking court areas should be block paving to avoid large expanses of black top asphalt which would have a negative visual appearance. Block paving has been provided between each sets of parking spaces. Additionally, block paving has been added to delineate between the spaces (confirmed by an annotation added to the surfacing material plan).

- The material treatment to the private drives of plots 86-88, 90,91,92,95 and 99 should also be block paving. In time these properties will look out on to a green space and therefore the highway treatment should reflect this. There applicant's agent advises that 'there is a considerable level change (going uphill) between the Fitzhugh Rise and the private drive serving these plots and the surfacing material will not be so visible from the public realm, therefore we are proposing to keep this as tarmac'.

- There are large areas of amenity grassland proposed. Amenity grass can be described as a "green desert" but does provide some carbon sequestration. Some specific grass varieties sequester 13t/Ha/Pa, produce 45% less clippings and are wear tolerant. For example, deep rooting grass mixes are more drought resistant, reduce need for irrigation, increase rainwater infiltration, reduce surface runoff and improve performance of sustainable drainage schemes. From a management point of view, this means a reduction in mowing costs and time, savings on fuel usage and emissions, reductions in green waste resulting in reduced environmental impact and significant less maintenance are all beneficial. The senior landscape consultant would therefore advise that seed mixes such as R450 Road and Rail are explored as an alternative to the standard amenity grass turf proposed within this scheme. The applicant's agent advises that 'the mixtures proposed have been included in the planting species on the landscape plans in addition to the existing proposals to maintain flexibility'.

- How will the northern site boundary be treated until the next phase comes forward? Currently there is no boundary treatment proposed beyond the parking bays for Plots 80 and 81, whereas ideally, we would recommend a knee rail or estate railing is in place, even if temporary. The applicant agent considers that recommending a boundary treatment might be difficult to retain during the construction phases of development, particularly if the site is hoarded off.

Planning Committee 55 of 131 3 February 2021

The council's landscape officer has raised no objections to the landscape proposals. It has obviously not been possible to retain any of the existing hedgerow which includes an ash tree within the site layout. The specification for tree planting adjacent to paved areas satisfactorily addresses the concern for minimising damage from tree roots. It is important that it is adhered to.

The landscape consultant has reconsulted on the amended landscaping and surfacing plans and any comments received will be included in the late papers.

The council's landscape officer considers that responsibility for the maintenance of some areas in front of buildings does not appear to be obvious and this needs to be made clear. A number of hedges are proposed which will need regular maintenance and the Berberis which is a dominant feature is very prickly. There are three grass areas within the highway to be adopted and it is to be hoped that this will not become an issue at the adoption stage.

No neighbour objections have been received in relation to the effect on landscape visual amenity of the development.

Subject to a condition requiring the detailed hard and soft landscaping scheme to be implemented the proposed development is considered to be in accordance with policies 3 (a), (b) and (e) of the JCS, the approved design code for phase 1 in relation to landscaping and condition 4 (c) (hard and soft landscaping) of outline planning permission reference WP/16/00271/VAR.

Effect on archaeology JCS policy 2 (d) requires that where proposals would result in the unavoidable and justifiable loss of archaeological remains, provision should be made for recording and the production of a suitable archive and report.

With regards the revised NPPF, section 16 sets out government advice on conserving and enhancing the historic environment and in particular paragraph 189 advises that, where appropriate, when determining an application which could affect a heritage asset with archaeological interest the council should, where appropriate, require developers to submit a field evaluation.

Northamptonshire archaeological advisor advises that archaeological evaluation has taken place within this area and no mitigation was required.

No objections have been received in relation to the effect on archaeology.

The proposed development would comply with policy 2 (d) of the JCS.

Effect on flood risk and drainage The JCS at policy 5 sets out a raft of sub policies aimed at preventing or reducing flood risk.

The revised NPPF at chapter 14 sets out government views on how the planning system should take into account the risks caused by flooding. The planning practice guidance under the chapter titled 'flood risk and climate change' gives detailed advice

Planning Committee 56 of 131 3 February 2021

on how planning can take account of the risks associated with flooding in the application process.

Condition 4 (A) (a) of variation to planning permission reference WP/16/00271/VAR seeks details of the layout, design and specification of drainage infrastructure.

Condition 20 of variation to planning permission reference WP/16/00271/VAR seeks details of a scheme for the disposal of surface water from that phase or sub-phase.

Parcel R10a is part of phase 1 and condition number 18 of variation to planning permission reference WP/16/00271/VAR has already been discharged for phase 1 and 2 of this development (see BCW's response to approval of details reserved by condition reference WP/18/00442/CND which states: 'condition 18 (phase 1 and 2) I would confirm that the details in the Peter Brett Associates revised Stage 2 Flood Risk Assessment Addendum - Rev A, Job number 27391, Note 2053 dated 9 November 2018 confirming the landswap has not resulted in a change to the development parcel boundaries (13 pages) received 12 November 2018 and the Peter Brett Associates North Wellingborough Stage 2 Flood Risk Assessment Project reference 23791/010 Revision 1 dated May 2014(pages 133) received 16 August 2018 are considered appropriate by the Environment Agency and the Northamptonshire Local Lead Flood Authority for the proposal. I am therefore able to approve the details of condition 18 in relation to phases 1 and 2 of the approval. This approval does not discharge the condition at this stage as it is subject to the scheme being fully implemented and subsequently maintained in accordance with the timing/phasing arrangements embodied within the scheme'.

Normally compliance statements are submitted to support reserved matters applications for each parcel with the phases to demonstrate compliance with the approved Stage 2 FRA given that condition no. 18 of variation to planning permission reference WP/16/00271/VAR has been partially discharged (Phases 1 and 2 only). For this application, the planning statement states parcel R10a is within Flood Zone 1 but does not refer to the model extents within the approved Stage 2 FRA. The Environment Agency have compared the general arrangement plan against the modelled 1% (1 in 100) and 0.1% (1 in 1000) extents within the Stage 2 FRA. No development is proposed within the modelled flood extents and as such, the Environment Agency have no objection to this application.

Anglian Water (AW) have reviewed the applicant's submitted surface water drainage information (Drainage Strategy) and consider that the impacts on AW public surface water sewerage network are acceptable and recommend the partial discharge of condition 20 of the outline planning application WP/16/00271/VAR.

Northamptonshire Local Lead Flood Authority (LLFA) have reviewed the information located within:

1) Technical Note TN001 North Wellingborough Parcel R10A entitled 'Reserved Matters Application Surface Water Drainage and Flood Risk' reference 47831 dated 18 September 2020. 2) Stantec drawing number 47831/2001/500/001 rev D entitled 'North Wellingborough Parcel R10a Drainage Layout' dated 30 October 2020.

Planning Committee 57 of 131 3 February 2021

LLFA advise that there is sufficient information to partially discharge condition 20, in respect of parcel 10a, of variation to planning permission WP/16/00271/VAR to which this application refers and confirm that the details for the disposal of surface water drainage has been satisfactorily addressed.

No neighbour objections have been received in relation to flood risk or surface water drainage.

The specification of the drainage infrastructure is considered to be appropriate and in accordance with policy 5 of the JCS and conditions 4 (A) (a) (specification of the drainage infrastructure) and 20 (details of a scheme for the disposal of surface water from that phase or sub-phase) of variation to planning permission reference WP/16/00271/VAR has been satisfied and at this stage can be partially discharged.

Effect on foul sewage JCS policy 6 requires new development to be supported by the timely delivery of infrastructure.

JCS Policy 10 (b) requires new development to minimise increases in the demand for additional/expanded water infrastructure. Whilst policy 10 (c) states that planning permission will only be granted if it can be demonstrated that there will be sufficient infrastructure capacity provided within an agreed timescale to support and meet all the requirements which arise from the proposed development. Policy 10 (d) continues by saying that the council and developers should work with infrastructure providers to identify viable solutions to deliver infrastructure where appropriate by phasing conditions, the use of interim measures and the provision of co-located facilities.

The NPPF at paragraph eight and elsewhere identifies the provision of infrastructure as part of the economic role as one of the three dimensions of sustainable development.

The applicant provided foul drainage strategy which sought to partially discharge condition 19 (foul water drainage strategy) of variation to planning permission reference WP/16/00271/VAR. Anglian Water have reviewed the applicants submitted foul drainage strategy and consider that the impacts on the public foul sewerage network are acceptable. Anglian water at this stage can therefore recommend the partial discharge of condition 19 of variation to planning permission reference WP/16/00271/VAR.

The foul drainage strategy is considered by Anglian Water to be acceptable and would comply with policy (10) (b), (10) (c) and 10 (d) of the JCS and condition 19 (foul water drainage strategy) of variation to planning permission reference WP/16/00271/VAR has been satisfied and at this stage can be partially discharged.

Effect on noise To ensure quality of life and safer and healthier communities the JCS at policy 8 (e) (ii) states that new development should be prevented from contributing to or being adversely affected by unacceptable levels of noise.

Chapter 15 of the revised NPPF gives advice on how local planning authorities should prevent new development from being adversely affected by unacceptable levels of noise pollution. The NPPF further advises that decisions should aim to avoid noise

Planning Committee 58 of 131 3 February 2021

from giving rise to significant adverse impacts on health and quality of life as a result of new development.

The PPG offers detailed advice on Noise which was updated on 24 December 2014.

The application was accompanied by a noise impact assessment by BWB consulting which concluded that the future noise environment is expected to be dominated by road traffic noise from the proposed Isham to Wellingborough improvement road (IWIMP). BCW environmental protection officers requested at the pre-application stage that mitigation measures should be included within the development to mitigate noise from the proposed IWIMP referencing the noise and vibration chapter undertaken to support the original outline planning permission prepared by Wardell Armstrong and dated February 2008.

Further transport modelling was undertaken in May 2020 for the proposed IWIMP and acoustic modelling of the suite has been carried out. The results from the noise modelling indicate that the upper guideline value will be exceeded for the proposed dwellings closest to the proposed IWIMP, where gardens are not fully sited on the screened side of dwellings.

In order to make the development acceptable regarding noise impact a number of mitigation scenarios have been assessed. The preferred form of mitigation is to provide localised acoustic barriers along both the IWIMP highway boundary and along the western site boundary. Acoustic barriers of between 4 to 5.5 metres in height are recommended to be provided both along the highway side of the south bound carriageway in order to reduce the external levels to within acceptable levels under 55db LAeq.T. Alternatively, a barrier of 6.5 metres in height along the western boundary will be required to reduce the external levels to within acceptable levels. The noise mitigation associated with the IWIMP highway would be provided with the construction of the highway and not as part of this reserved matters application.

It is recommended that for all proposed dwellings located closest to the proposed IWIMP, all criteria should be achieved with uprated thermal double glazing such as a 6 millimetre/6-16 millimetre/16 millimetre argon/8.8 millimetre optiphon to provide minimum of 33 db. Acoustic ventilators which achieve a minimum performance of 44 db such as a passive attenuated in wall vent would be required.

For the remaining dwellings across the site, all criteria should be achieved with standard thermal double glazing such as a configuration of 6 millimetre/6-16 millimetre/10 millimetre to provide a minimum 31db. Acoustic trickle ventilators which achieve a minimum performance of 38b would also be required.

The assessment concludes that "with the implementation of appropriate mitigation measures, noise from the proposed IWIMP can be suitably controlled to protect the amenity of future residents of the proposed development".

The council's environmental protection officer advises that the report assesses the impact of traffic noise from the proposed Isham to Wellingborough Improvement Road (IWIMP) on the proposed development site. The predicted noise levels have been assessed against the guideline sound levels published in British Standard:BS8233:2014 and the World Health Organisation Community Noise Guidelines. The assessment

Planning Committee 59 of 131 3 February 2021

method appears to comply with industry good practice.

The noise assessment report by BWB Consulting (Ref. MCA2105-001 Rev 2, dated July 2020) considered three options for the future traffic noise mitigation and the council's environmental protection officer considers that the application did not make it clear which of these is to be implemented.

The council's environmental protection officer advises that "in practice, it would be logical to rely on mitigation measures being provided as part of the IWIMP project as until that is built (if it is ever built) there is no need for the mitigation and the current developer could be incurring unnecessary costs by providing an on -site mitigation scheme.

The glazing scheme proposed by BWB Consulting does not take into account the mitigation provided by either of the proposed schemes for noise barriers.

It is suggested that the proposed site layout could be approved on the basis that any necessary noise barrier will be provided as part of the IWIMP scheme.

It is also recommended that, for clarity on the proposals, the noise assessment should be updated, and the proposed glazing scheme re-evaluated and submitted for approval prior to construction of the dwellings commencing. If it is found that it will still be necessary to rely on closed windows to achieve satisfactory internal noise levels, then an assessment of the risk of overheating together with proposals for providing adequate cooling ventilation should also be submitted for approval.

Consideration should also be given to the internal layout of the houses to minimise the number of noise sensitive rooms on any façade where reliance on closed windows is needed".

The council's environmental protection officer recommends that the proposed layout scheme should be approved on the basis that traffic noise mitigation measures will be provided as part of the IWIMP road scheme when it is constructed. The condition set out below should be attached to any reserved matters consent:

"Prior to any construction work commencing on site the environmental noise impact assessment shall be reviewed and a report shall be submitted to and approved by the local planning authority. The review should assume that traffic noise mitigation is provided as part of the proposed IWIMP road scheme. Where necessary the report shall include proposals to mitigate any observed adverse effects due to noise on the health and quality of life of the future residents. If it is found that it will be necessary to rely on closed windows to achieve satisfactory internal noise levels, then an assessment of the risk of overheating together with proposals for providing adequate cooling ventilation should also be submitted for approval. The assessment shall be carried out by a competent person and where appropriate have regard to the following guidance;

- Professional Practice Guidance, ProPG: Planning & Noise - New Residential Development

Planning Committee 60 of 131 3 February 2021

- British Standard, BS8233:2014 - British Standard, BS4142:2014 - World Health Organisation, Community Noise Guidelines - Acoustics Ventilation and Overheating - Residential Design Guide

The approved scheme shall be implemented prior to the first occupation of any associated dwelling".

Subject to the imposition of a condition requiring the environmental noise impact assessment to be reviewed and a report assuming that traffic noise mitigation is provided as part of the proposed IWIMP road scheme. The report shall include proposals to mitigate any observed adverse effects due to noise on the health and quality of life of the future residents. If it is found that it will be necessary to rely on closed windows to achieve satisfactory internal noise levels, then an assessment of the risk of overheating together with proposals for providing adequate cooling ventilation should also be submitted for approval. The proposed development policy 8 (e) (i) and (ii) of the JCS and advice in the NPPF policies regarding noise.

Condition 15 of variation to planning permission WP/16/00271/VAR requires a construction environmental management plan (CEMP) to be approved prior to the commencement of any phase or sub phase.

To adhere to condition 15, the original application was accompanied by North Wellingborough parcel 10A construction access construction environmental management plan reference 27391/2100/001 Stantec dated 2 October 2020.

The council's environmental protection officer (noise) has assessed the content of the submitted 'construction environmental management plan and considers that "it outlines the general arrangements for the management of dust and noise emissions from the construction works, however, it is made clear that this is only an overview and it is stated that "the contractor will prepare 'specific method statements detailing how they plan to implement the construction management procedures, detailed in this construction environmental management plan (CEMP) and shall take into account the philosophy promoted by the CEMP". It is the view of the environmental protection officer view that the CEMP is not complete at this stage and the environmental protection officer cannot support the partial discharging condition 15 until the specific method statements are submitted for approval".

Further text has been added to paragraph 1.2.3 of the CEMP Rev A, the applicant's agent considers that the text is sufficient for the purposes of this CEMP. Details on method statements can be conditioned post reserved matter consent approval if necessary.

The council's environmental protection officer has been re-consulted on the amended CEMP Rev A and any comments received including any additional conditions will be set out in the late papers.

The council's environmental protection service has powers to deal with any unacceptable noise caused by building works as necessary under the provisions of the Environmental Protection Act 1990 and it has published a leaflet entitled 'considerate contractor advice note'. It should be noted that Northants LLP the lead developer has

Planning Committee 61 of 131 3 February 2021

appointed a customer liaison officer who liaises with existing residents and the site managers to assist in responding to any complaints or queries which arise on the development sites.

Northamptonshire highways have reviewed the submitted revised construction environmental management plan (CEMP) and recommends the partial discharge of condition 15 of variation to planning permission reference WP/16/00271/VAR.

Neighbour objections have been received in relation to the effects of noise.

Subject to the amended CEMP Rev A dated January 2021 and the traffic management plan being implemented throughout the construction process the proposed development would comply with policy 8 (e) (i) of the JCS and condition 15 (a detailed construction environmental management plan) of variation to outline planning permission reference WP/16/00271/VAR.

Effect on air quality The JCS at policy 8 amongst other things, requires development not to result in an unacceptable impact on neighbours by reason of pollution.

To ensure quality of life and safer and healthier communities the JCS at policy 8 (e) (i) requires development not to have an unacceptable impact on amenities by reason of pollution, whilst 8 (e) (ii) goes further by stating that both new and existing development should be prevented from contributing to or being adversely affected by unacceptable levels of air pollution.

Chapter 15 of the revised NPPF offers broad advice on how local planning authorities should prevent both existing and new development from being adversely affected by unacceptable levels of air pollution.

The PPG at paragraph 001 of the air quality section dated 6 March 2014 states that 'It is important that the potential impact of new development on air quality is taken into account in planning where the national assessment indicates that relevant limits have been exceeded or are near the limit'. The guidance goes on to explain the implications for local authorities if national objectives are not met which this will include measures in pursuit of the objectives which could have implications for planning. The PPG at paragraph 009 demonstrates how considerations about air quality fit into the development management process.

The East Midlands region is looking to minimise the cumulative impact on local air quality that ongoing development has rather than looking at significance.

As the proposed development includes the provision for vehicle parking. A key theme of the revised NPPF is that developments should enable future occupiers to make "green" vehicle choices and paragraph 110 (e) "incorporate facilities for charging plug-in and other ultra-low emission vehicles". Policy 15 (c) of the JCS seeks for the design of development to give priority to sustainable means of transport including measures to contribute towards meeting the modal shift targets in the Northamptonshire Transportation Plan.

Planning Committee 62 of 131 3 February 2021

The applicant has agreed to the imposition of a condition for a scheme for the provision of charging points for electric vehicles to be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The scheme shall identify the dwellings in each phase that will benefit from a charging point for electric vehicles and the location of any charging point for electric vehicles.

No neighbour objections have been received in relation to the effects on air quality.

Subject to the imposition of a condition requiring a scheme for electric charging points to be installed prior to the first occupation of the associated dwelling, the proposed development would comply with policy 15 (c) of the JCS and paragraph 110 (e) of the NPPF.

Effect on biodiversity Paragraph 40 of the Natural Environment and Rural Communities Act, under the heading of 'duty to conserve biodiversity' states "every public authority must, in exercising its functions, have regard, so far as is consistent with the proper exercise of those functions, to the purpose of conserving biodiversity."

The JCS at policy 4 - biodiversity and geodiversity, sets out policy requirements for the protection and where possible, a net gain in biodiversity.

The revised NPPF at chapter 15 'conserving and enhancing the natural environment' sets out government views on minimising the impacts on biodiversity, providing net gains where possible and contributing to halt the overall decline in biodiversity.

Northamptonshire principal project officer (ecology) recommends that the close-board fences on the boundary plan drawing number GPWEL-MCB-ZZ-ZZ-DR-A-0231 rev D5- P2 to include hedgehog holes to allow hedgehogs to forage among the gardens, which will also deliver a measure of pest control for residents.

The locations of hedgehog holes have been identified on amended drawing number GPWEL-MCB-ZZ-ZZ-DR-A-0231 rev D5-P3 (external materials and boundary treatment plan).

No neighbour objections have been received in relation to the effect of the development on biodiversity.

The proposed development would comply with policy 4 of the JCS and advice contained within chapter 15 of the NPPF 'conserving and enhancing the natural environment.

Housing mix Policy 30 (a) (i) of the JCS states that proposals provide a mix of dwelling sizes and tenures and should avoid an over concentration of a single house type in one part of the site where it would adversely affect the character/infrastructure of the area, and should reflect the need for smaller households (1 -3 bedrooms).

Policy 30 (a) (ii) of the JCS seeks to ensure there would not be an overconcentration of a single type of housing where this would adversely affect the character or infrastructure of the area.

Planning Committee 63 of 131 3 February 2021

Policy 2 (e) of PBW seeks a mixture of housing types, sizes and tenures including specialist housing to meet the needs of older persons, accessible housing, starter homes and self -build.

The proposed housing mix throughout the proposed development would consist 16 one-bedroom apartments, 6 two-bedroom apartments, 1 two-bedroom flat over garage (FOG), 54 two-bedroom houses, 65 three-bedroom houses and 6 four-bedroom houses.

The application proposes the following splits between market, affordable rent and shared ownership units:

No. of Affordable Affordable Affordable Overall Bedrooms Market % Rent % Shared ownership % Total % Total Overall % 1 11 14.1 5 14.29 0 5 7.14 16 10.81 2 11 14.1 17 48.57 18 51.43 35 50 46 31.08 3 54 69.24 11 31.43 17 48.57 28 40 82 55.41 4 2 2.56 2 5.71 2 2.86 4 2.7 5 0 0 Total 78 100 35 100 35 100 70 100 148 100

There would be provision for a total of 70 affordable dwellings consisting of 35 affordable rent dwellings and 35 shared ownership dwellings provided within parcel R10a. The remaining 78 units are designated as market housing. The affordable dwellings would consist of 5 one-bedroom apartments, 3 two-bedroom apartments, 1 two-bedroom flat over a garage, 31 two-bed houses, 28 three-bedroom houses and 2 four-bedroom houses.

Policy 30 (a) (ii) of the JCS seeks the avoidance of an over concentration of single house types or tenures should be distributed throughout the site in small clusters therefore indistinguishable from other units in quality and appearance as this is likely to impact adversely on local infrastructure and amenities. It is noted that the current proposed scheme affordable housing provision is dispersed reasonably well throughout the site and the housing development officer would recommend that this is acceptable.

No neighbour objections have been received in relation to an overconcentration of a single dwelling type or an adverse effect on the character of the area.

The proposed development would comply with policy 30 (a) (i) and (ii) of the JCS and policy 2 (E) of PBW.

National space standards The JCS at Policy 30 (b) requires the internal floor area of new dwellings to meet the National Space Standards as a minimum. Condition 31 of the variation to planning permission reference WP/16/00271/VAR reflects this requirement.

Any reserved matters application for affordable or market housing should be accompanied by plans demonstrating compliance with the national space standards. The proposed gross minimum internal floor and storage areas for each dwelling should comply with the technical housing standards. The single and double bedrooms proposed within each dwelling should comply with the technical requirements.

Planning Committee 64 of 131 3 February 2021

All the dwellings meet the requirements of the technical housing standards - nationally described space standards (2015).

The council's housing development officer is satisfied that the floor plans are in alignment with NDSS.

No neighbour objections have been received in relation to the national space standards.

The proposed development would comply with policy 30 (b) of the JCS, the environmental set out in the design code in relation the national space standards and condition 31 (national space standards) of variation to outline planning permission reference WP/16/00271/VAR

National accessibility standards Policy 30 (c) seeks new dwellings to meet category 2 of the National Accessibility Standards as a minimum.

All units should achieve category 2 of the National Accessibility Standards as a minimum with at least one being wheelchair accessible. This is in accordance with the Housing Action Plan 2018-2023, which specifies that 5% of all affordable housing units should be wheelchair accessible. Condition 32 of the variation to planning permission reference WP/16/00271/VAR reflected this requirement.

However, schedule 2, part 6 (sustainability) paragraph 2 of the S106 legal agreement for variation to planning permission reference WP/16/00271/VAR requires a minimum of 10% of all dwellings to be constructed in accordance with the accessibility standard (category 2) and 5% of all dwellings to be constructed in accordance with the accessibility standard (category 3). Such dwellings shall be spread evenly across all phases of the development and shall be identified as part of each reserved matters application.

Under the provisions set out under the legal agreement 15 (category 2) and 7 (category 3) accessibility standard dwellings should be provided within the overall development. Any reserved matters application should be accompanied by plans demonstrating compliance with the national accessibility standards.

Thirty dwellings would be complaint with M4 (2) and none of the dwellings would be compliant with M4 (3). Drawing number GPWEL MCB ZZ ZZ DR A 0233 D5 Rev P7 (tenure plan) demonstrate that thirty dwellings on the site will be M4 (2) compliant which comprises 20% of the overall number of dwellings. These dwellings are on plots 23 -27 (inclusive), 29, 32 -39 (inclusive), 51 -60 (inclusive) and 134 -139 (inclusive). In addition, 53 further dwellings would provide compliance on the internal provisions of category M4 (2), whilst not according with the external access requirements. This equates to a further 36% of the units.

On page 33 of the design code compliance statement the over provision of the M4 (2) dwellings and the provision of no M4 (3) units "is due to the land which is the subject of this application having some challenging topography with the steepest part of the site having gradients of up to 1:10 and 1:5. For the site to work for both highways and housing there will be a requirement for an earthworks exercise to be carried out. In doing this the site will be re-profiled so in the steeper areas the gradients will attain

Planning Committee 65 of 131 3 February 2021

acceptable highway gradients. However, because of these level's issues on site it becomes difficult to achieve M4 (3) on this area of the development.

Although no dwellings would meet with any level of category M4(3) compliance within this parcel, 56% of the dwellings would either meet in full or part compliance with category M4 (2)".

The housing council's housing development officer notes that 30 units are compliant with category M4 (2). Policy 30 (c) of the JCS does require that all homes are delivered to category M4 (2) and that 5% are category M4 (3) wheelchair accessible. However, the s106 agreement for this SUE requires 10% of the dwellings to be category M4 (2) and 5% of the dwellings to be category M4 (3). Due to the step gradient of this particular parcel it is accepted that no category M4 (3) dwellings will be provided however, 20% of the dwellings will be category M4 (2) and 56% of the overall dwellings will be either fully or partly compliant with category M4 (2).

No neighbour objections have been received in relation to compliance with the national accessibility standards.

The proposed development would not comply with schedule 2, part 6, paragraph 2 of the S106 legal agreement for variation to planning permission reference WP/16/00271/VAR, however, the applicant has provided justification for departing from this requirement in the legal agreement and have compensated for the lack of any category 3 provision by over providing the highest level of category 2 housing. Officers consider this proposed departure to be acceptable.

Affordable housing Policy 30 (d) of the JCS on sustainable urban extensions requires the provision of 20% affordable housing in phases to be developed by March 2026, with provision to be made for a review of the viable level of affordable housing in the later phases.

However, schedule 2, part 2, paragraph 2.1 of the S106 legal agreement for variation to planning permission reference WP/16/00271/VAR requires the provision or procurement of the provision of dwellings in phase 1 for 10% of the first 750 dwellings to be occupied shall be provided as affordable dwellings and 20% of the remainder of dwellings to be occupied shall be affordable dwellings in phase 1.

50% are to be social rent dwellings and or affordable rent dwellings and 50% are to be intermediate dwellings.

To date this requirement for the provision has been subdivided amongst the individual reserved matters parcels, however this, reserved matters application seeks an overprovision of affordable housing.

Schedule 2, part 2, paragraph 4.8 of the S106 legal agreement for variation to planning permission reference WP/16/00271/VAR provides the ability to over provide and states "with the prior written agreement of the council the phase 1 owners may voluntarily construct more than the agree number of affordable dwellings on any sub phase in phase 1 and such additional affordable dwellings shall be credited against the affordable housing requirement of a subsequent sub phase as agreed with the council".

Planning Committee 66 of 131 3 February 2021

There are currently 743 dwellings already homes already approved (74 which are affordable in phase 1. This scheme proposes to provide an additional 148 dwellings on top of the current total of 743 dwellings and 70 of these dwellings would be affordable, taking the affordable housing provision total to 144 homes.

The credit is calculated against a reserved matters application which was providing affordable housing in accordance with paragraph 2.1 of the S106 i.e. no over provision. This is set out in the table below:

RMA Total Total % Cumulative Cumulative Homes Affordable Affordable Total Total Homes Homes Homes Affordable Homes R10a (as 148 70 47.3% 891 144 proposed) R10a (as 148 28 891 102 per S106)

Affordable 42 42 housing credit.

This is based on the 148 homes on parcel 10a which would take the total number of homes provided within phase 1 from 743 (parcels R1 & R2 = 199; parcels R4a =40; R5 & R6 = 261; Parcels R8a & R8b = 238 and the local centre = 5) to 891, surpassing the first 750 total for the 10% affordable housing threshold. Therefore 1 affordable home within the 10% threshold (7 takes the total to 750 (750-743). There are then 141 homes to reach the total of 891 for which to meet the 20% requirement would mean 27 of these are to be affordable. The total affordable homes to be provided if the reserved matters application were directly meeting the affordable housing provisions of the S106 would be 28.

As set out above 70 affordable homes are being provided as part of this reserved matters application, therefore the credit accumulated would be 42 (70 total affordable homes provided minus 28 affordable homes required to be provided as per the S106 agreement).

The revised statement seeks confirmation from the council's housing development officer that 'planned additional affordable units (42 dwellings) will be used as an offset against other adjacent phase's'. The provision in the s106 agreement this refers to allows only for offset against a single phase, not phases.

At paragraph 6.11 in the planning statement this states that 'the credit accumulation is 39 homes' (revised to 42 following a further updated housing statement). There is no accumulation of credit delivered through this parcel. However, the over delivery of 42 homes on this parcel can be offset against the 20% affordable homes obligation on one other parcel as per the terms of the s106 agreement.

The early delivery and overprovision of affordable housing on parcel R10a would support BCW's requirement to provide affordable housing and meet high local demand. Subject to the approval of this reserved matters application there would be no

Planning Committee 67 of 131 3 February 2021

requirement for the delivery of affordable housing on parcel R7 through reserved matters application WP/20/00811/REM.

The scheme includes the provision of 47.3% affordable housing consisting of 35 affordable rent dwellings and 35 shared ownership dwellings.

The affordable rent dwellings would consist of 5 one-bedroom apartments, 3 two- bedroom apartments, 14 two-bedroom houses, 11 three-bedroom houses and 2 four- bedroom houses.

The shared ownership dwellings would consist of 1 two bedroom FOG, 17 two-bedroom houses and 17 three-bedroom houses.

50% should be social rent dwellings and or affordable rent dwellings and 50% should be intermediate dwellings.

The council's housing development officer has confirmed that this is aligned to a previously agreed 50/50 split agreed for this site. The remaining 78 units are designated as market housing.

Housing Need The Strategic Housing Market Assessment (SHMA) (revised 2015) identifies that the following breakdown of bedrooms and size would be in line with the housing needs identified within the SHMA

- 1 bed (58%) - 2 bed (10%) - 3 bed (30%) - Some 4+ bed (2%)

However much of this data is outdated and a better indication of the housing needs of the borough is the Housing Register. The proposed affordable breakdown and the overall breakdown are compared below to the SHMA and the housing register data as of 10 November 2020.

No. of Register Register Affordable Proposal Bedrooms SHMA % (10/11/2020) % % Overall % 1 58 204 34.69 7.46 10.81 2 10 249 42.35 23.88 18.24 3 30 98 16.67 68.66 69.6 4 2 32 5.44 0 1.35 5 5 0.85 Total 100 588 100 100 100

The council's housing development officer considers that there is a degree of alignment between the proposed overall breakdown and the identified needs. It is noted that there is a slight overprovision of three-bedroom homes and under-provision of one-bedroom and the council's housing development officer welcomes the strong delivery of two bedroomed homes which meets a key area of need.

Planning Committee 68 of 131 3 February 2021

No neighbour objections have been received in relation to the affordable housing provision.

The proposed development would comply with schedule 2, part 2, paragraph 2.1 of the S106 legal agreement for variation to planning permission reference WP/16/00271/VAR and the housing tenure mix and broadly accord the projected housing needs set out under the SHMA.

Effect/impact on the living conditions of the neighbouring occupiers and the future occupiers of the development The JCS at policy 8 (e) (i) details policy relating to the protection of amenity of neighbouring occupiers.

At paragraph 127 of the revised NPPF the government requires new development to provide 'a high standard of amenity for all existing and future users'.

The amended layout of the proposed residential development has been designed to ensure that it would not have a harmful effect on the amenities of the future occupiers of the individual dwellings in terms of light, outlook and privacy.

No neighbour objections have been received in relation to the effects on neighbouring amenity.

The proposed development would comply with policy 8 (e) (i) of the JCS.

Effect/Impact on highway safety in relation to (the proposed access arrangement and parking provision) JCS policy 8 (b) (i) gives a number of requirements that new development should achieve with regards to highway, pedestrian and other sustainable transport matters.

JCS policy 8 (b) (ii) seeks to ensure a satisfactory means of access and provision for parking, servicing and manoeuvring in accordance with adopted standards.

Condition 4 (b) of variation to planning permission reference WP/16/00271/VAR seeks details of vehicle, cycle and foot access routes and parking.

Access roads and pedestrian footways On page 19 of the design code statement of compliance a street structure diagram outlines the accesses to sites R10a from the primary streets known as Park Drive and Ridgeway in the design code and the hierarchy of the streets. The proposed site layout plan shown on drawing number GPWEL-MCB-ZZ-ZZ-DR -A-0230 D5 - P8 shows the hierarchy of the streets in more detail.

The parking courtyard serving plots 1 - 22 (inclusive) will be accessed off the most northern side of Beaumont Street (shown as Park Drive in the design code).

The remainder of parcel R10a will be served off two new local routes off the western side of Fitzhugh Rise (shown as Ridgeway in the design code).

Planning Committee 69 of 131 3 February 2021

Both Beaumont Street and Fitzhugh Rise have been installed by the lead developer Northants LLP.

Fitzhugh Rise comprises of a 6.5 metre wide carriageway with a two metre wide verge on the western side providing laybys for visitor parking and street trees and a two metre wide footway.

Local route B is the predominant highway type within the neighbourhood areas of the scheme and will comprise of 5.5 metre wide carriageways with two metre wide footways on either side. Dedicated visitor parking laybys have been included within the local routes and a limited number of areas where on street visitor parking could potentially occur. The street hierarchy diagram indicates that there are two local route B's accessed off the main spine road (Fitzhugh Rise) contained within parcel R10a.

Three shared surface streets will extend off the local route B's. These are formed from a 7.8 metre wide block paved finish with a 4.8 metre central zone and 1.5 metre margins on either side.

The layout includes a small number of private drives which are arranged as unadopted extensions to shared surfaces to serve no more than 5 dwelling houses.

Route B, the minor routes and shared driveways will be constructed by the applicant Northants LLP.

Northamptonshire highways recommends that the service strip must continue at a full width of 1.5 metres to the rear of the visitor spaces in tertiary streets. The applicant has submitted amended plans showing this change across the layout plans. Northamptonshire highways have been reconsulted on this change and any response will be included in the late papers.

Northamptonshire highways recommends the amended plans meet with the requirements of the local highway authority but to partially discharge conditions 4 (b) and 16 a copy of technical approval from the local highway authority is required. Conditions should be imposed requiring details full engineering, drainage, street lighting and constructional details of the streets proposed for adoption; no dwelling or dwellings shall be occupied until the street(s) affording access to those dwelling(s) has been completed to wearing course and details of the proposed arrangements for future management and maintenance of the proposed streets within the development.

Highway Access and phasing during the construction process Condition 27 (Highway and access phasing) a new plan reference 47831/2001/100/008 - Construction Traffic Management Plan has been prepared and submitted. Northamptonshire highways has reviewed the submitted construction traffic management plan and recommends the partial discharge of condition 27 of variation to planning permission reference WP/16/00271/VAR.

Public Right of Way The application site is not affected by a public right of way.

Planning Committee 70 of 131 3 February 2021

Parking Parking accommodation should be provided in accordance with the Northamptonshire parking standards (2016) and satisfy policy 8 (b) (i) of the JCS. A one-bedroom dwelling should provide one allocated parking space. A two or three-bedroom dwelling should provide two allocated parking spaces. A four-bedroom dwelling should provide three allocated parking spaces. The development should include 25% unallocated visitor parking in layby's 2 metres in depth. Garages do not count as parking spaces.

The proposed parking strategy plan shown on drawing number PWEL MCB ZZ ZZ DR A 0235 D5 Rev P2 (parking strategy plan) would comply with the parking standards for allocated and unallocated parking and would not result in highway capacity or safety issues. Where garages are not provided sheds have been provided for cycle storage with each dwelling. The width and depth of parking spaces would comply with the standards set out in the Northamptonshire parking standards and are shown as being wider where adjacent to physical structures such as walls and fences as set out in the guidance. The allocated parking for 30 dwellings would be compliant with M4/2 of the building regulations and provide access from parking spaces for persons with accessibility issues.

Northamptonshire highways have not raised any objections to the parking strategy plan.

No neighbour objections have been received in relation to the parking provision, highway safety or capacity.

The proposed development would comply with policy 8 (b) (i) and (ii) of the JCS, the parameters set out in the design code in relation to street hierarchy and car parking typologies and conditions 4(b) (vehicle, cycle and foot access routes and parking) and 27 (highway access and phasing) of variation to outline planning permission reference WP/16/00271/VAR can be partially discharged as part of this hybrid application.

Contamination The JCS at policy 6 says that local planning authorities will seek to maximise the delivery of development through the re-use of suitable previously developed land within the urban areas. Where development is intended on a site known or suspected of being contaminated a remediation strategy will be required to manage the contamination. The policy goes on to inform that planning permission will be granted where it can be established that the site can safely and viably be developed with no significant impact on either future users of the development or on ground surface and waters.

The revised NPPF at paragraphs 178 and 179 sets out policies on development involving contaminated land. The planning practice guidance also offers detailed government advice on this topic.

The council's environmental protection officer (contamination) has no objections to make on this application for land contamination. However, a condition is recommended to be imposed on any consent in the event of any unexpected contamination being discovered during the course of the construction works.

Condition 21 of variation to planning permission reference WP/16/00271/VAR states "if during development, contamination not previously identified is found to be present at

Planning Committee 71 of 131 3 February 2021

the site then no further development shall be carried out until the developer has submitted to, and obtained written approval from the local planning authority for, an amendment to the remediation strategy detailing how this unsuspected contamination shall be dealt with. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved amendment to the remediation strategy".

Therefore, there is no need to impose a condition on any reserved matters consent in relation to unexpected contamination being discovered during the course of the construction works as this condition is already imposed on the outline planning permission and would be still applicable.

No neighbour objections have been received in relation to contamination.

Subject to adherence to condition 21 of variation to planning permission reference WP/16/00271/VAR the proposed development would comply with policy 6 of the JCS.

Crime and disorder Section 17 of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998 details the need for the council to do all that it reasonably can to prevent, crime and disorder in its area.

The JCS at policy 8 (e) (iv) sets out the policy requirement for new development to seek to design out crime and disorder and reduce the fear of crime.

The adopted designing out crime supplementary planning guidance gives detailed advice this issue.

The revised NPPF at paragraph 127 (f) state that decisions should aim to ensure that developments create safe, inclusive and accessible environments which promote health and wellbeing with a high standard of amenity for existing and future users and where crime and disorder, and the fear of crime, do not undermine quality of life or community cohesion and resilience.

A site safety and crime prevention section has been included within the design code compliance statement.

Northamptonshire police recommend that the apartment blocks (plot numbers 1-22) balcony design will allow ease of climbing between balconies and should be reconsidered. It would be preferable that the balustrade does not allow easy foot hold and that the design does not allow ease of hand hold to the balcony above.

The applicant's agent has advised "the proposal of metal railing and supporting columns for the balconies was agreed in principle during pre-application discussions. However, further details for balconies design could be provided as part of a condition discharge if necessary, to ensure that an easy grab if standing on the ground floor balcony railing is avoided".

Northamptonshire police recommend that when the lighting scheme has been produced it is important that as well as adopted areas being considered that unadopted areas are similarly treated for safety and security reasons. Often lighting will only be on the adopted areas leaving very dark areas on the private drives and within courtyards.

Planning Committee 72 of 131 3 February 2021

The site safety and crime prevention section included within the design code compliance statement in relation to lighting states "all adoptable roads will be lit in accordance with a lighting scheme which accords with Northamptonshire highways requirements. The private parking courtyard will be lit to the local planning authority satisfaction and will be maintained by the relevant registered social landlord or management company. The design of the coach lamps and external lighting to individual plots will also be subject to the local planning authority approval".

Stantec drawing number 47831/2001/1300/001 Rev A (North Wellingborough parcel R10 street lighting) accompanied the reserved matters application, this drawing relates to street lighting and does not provide details as to how the private driveways/courtyards are to be lit.

Condition 4 (c) requires details of lighting to be provided with each reserved matter's application. Condition 16 requires a lighting strategy for each sub phase. The public lighting provided in the highway verges will be adopted by Northamptonshire highways. However, a condition should be imposed requiring details of lighting to be provided the unadopted areas, to ensure these areas are not susceptible to crime and anti-social behaviour.

No neighbour objections have been received in relation to crime and disorder.

Subject to the imposition of conditions requiring details of lighting to be provided to unadoptable areas and details and design of the balconies proposed serving plots 1-22 inclusive having regard for crime prevention and 'Secured by Design' principles, the proposed development would comply with policy 8 (e) (vi) and (ii) of the JCS, the parameters set out in the design code in relation to the built form and conditions 4(c) (details of lighting) and 16 (lighting strategy) of variation to outline planning permission reference WP/16/00271/VAR.

Other Matters

Lighting Condition 4 (c) requires details of lighting to be provided with each reserved matter's application.

Condition 16 of variation to planning permission reference WP/16/00271/VAR states: "prior to the commencement of development on a phase or sub phase or infrastructure element in connection with any phase a lighting strategy for that phase, sub phase or infrastructure element shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The details shall thereafter be implemented in accordance with the approved strategy and prior to completion of that phase, sub phase or infrastructure element in connection with any phase".

The application was accompanied by a lighting strategy by Stantec dated October 2020 which concluded the following:

"The residential parcel R10A at Glenvale Park will introduce new sources of light into a relatively dark area of low district brightness. The desk-based assessment resulted in the R10A site and the surrounding area being classified as ILP Environmental Zone 2, rural, low district brightness.

Planning Committee 73 of 131 3 February 2021

Identified sensitive receptors include future residents of the approved outline site once built out, existing residents (Wellingborough, Great Harrowden and Little Harrowden), the heritage setting of Wellingborough Grange Farm, users of roads and public right of Ways within the approved outline site, as well as ecological receptors in existing and newly created habitats within the approved outline site.

The main source of lighting resulting from the R10A development will be street lighting. A preliminary street lighting design has been prepared for the R10A development, which has been developed to provide the minimum lighting requirements for safety and security in accordance with recognised standards and guidance as set out in this report, while reducing the effects from obtrusive light onto sensitive receptors.

It is anticipated that further modelling to determine the levels of obtrusive light will be undertaken at technical approval stage, following any comments from Northamptonshire County Council. This will include confirming that the light intrusion into windows (vertical illuminance on properties) and glare (luminous intensity of bright luminaires) are within the recommended maximum values for the control of obtrusive light. A series of mitigation measures have been set out in section 8 of the lighting strategy to reduce potential effects on the identified receptors as a result of obtrusive light during the construction of the R10A development.

Therefore, it is considered that, although there will be new light introduced into the area, with the implementation of the mitigation measures identified in section 8 of the lighting strategy, the amount of obtrusive light (light pollution) will be within guideline levels (ie Zone E2), whilst complying with Northamptonshire County Council's Construction Requirements and Specification for Adoptable Highways as well as BS5489-1:2013).

The Commission for Darker Skies (CDFS) comments are based upon the street lighting layout contained on Stantec drawing number 47831/2001/1300/001 REV A. CFDS notes that the proposed lighting is to be adopted by the local highway authority and is to be dimmed to 60% from 22:00 to 06:00. As a result, CFDS does not consider this proposed lighting will generate any significant energy waste from glare or light pollution due to the scheme being required to meet LA PFI specifications on column locations, spacing and lighting apparatus design.

Northamptonshire highways recommends that the applicant is required to submit a copy of the technical approval from the local highway authority in order to partially discharge this condition. A condition should be added to any reserved matters consent requiring "prior to the commencement of any construction works in any parcel or phase details full engineering, drainage, street lighting and constructional details of the streets proposed for adoption being submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The development shall, thereafter, be constructed in accordance with the approved details, unless an alternative timetable is otherwise agreed in writing with the local planning authority".

The council's environmental protection officer recommends that the submitted lighting strategy deals primarily with the design of street lighting for the development. Nuisance from the construction phase lighting requirements is also discussed, however, it is stated that "… these potential impacts will be managed in the construction environmental management plan (CEMP)". The council's environmental protection

Planning Committee 74 of 131 3 February 2021

officer will comment on the detailed CEMP when it is submitted for approval and has no comments to make regarding the proposed street lighting strategy.

The applicant's agent advises that paragraph 3.4.2 of the CEMP already included arrangements to minimise impacts of compound lighting, however an additional comment has been added to confirm a method statement would be provided. The applicant's agent advises that this can be conditioned along with other method statements in the CEMP if necessary.

The council's environmental protection officer has been reconsulted in relation to the lighting paragraph's in the amended CEMP Rev A and any further response or suggested conditions will be included in the late papers.

No neighbour objections have been received in relation to lighting.

Subject to the imposition of a condition in relation to the details of how the private driveways are to be lit the proposed lighting scheme is acceptable for the areas where public lighting is to be provided and condition 16 can be partially discharged as part of this hybrid application.

Sustainability Policy 9 (i) of the JCS seeks developments to incorporate measures to ensure high standards of resource and energy efficiency and reduction in carbon emissions.

Condition 23 of variation to planning permission reference WP/16/00271/VAR seeks all reserved matters applications for buildings to be accompanied by a sustainability statement that demonstrates how environmental sustainability issues have been addressed during the design process and sets out the way in which the credits under relevant BREEAM rating will be achieved based on the actual design of commercial units in particular in the relevant parcel.

The application was accompanied by a sustainability statement revision 1 by environmental economics consultancy. In order to reduce residual carbon emissions a number of improvements have been made to the standard material and product specification. The building fabric is to be improved from basic part L compliance to an enhanced specification including insultation thickness, upgraded materials, enhanced double glazing and air permeability of 5.01m3/hr/m2 and bespoke thermal bridging details. Product improvements are proposed including boilers, cylinders and low energy lighting.

The council's appointed sustainability consultant has confirmed that the sustainability report received shows details of the sample dwellings energy usage which has a 3.97% saving over part L from fabric upgrades.

The council's appointed sustainability consultant sustainability report received details of water use and includes calculations using an appropriate methodology showing that 110 and 102.4 l/p/d total is used for different properties, however this included 5 l/p/d external use so after accounting for that compliant design is demonstrated. This would comply with the criteria set out under policy 9 of the JCS in relation to water usage.

Planning Committee 75 of 131 3 February 2021

The council's appointed sustainability consultant recommends that in relation to policy 9 (i) the report includes justification for not maximising solar design in that this would be more likely to cause problems with overheating (thus requiring active cooling and more energy use) than to significantly reduce heating energy demand. This is generally true for this style of housing.

The council's appointed sustainability consultant recommends that in relation to policy 9 (ii) it is shown that no network is present or planned. Planning one is not feasible on a parcel level and would have had to be planned at a wider scale. Given this individual heating is the best option and this does not allow a meaningful way to safeguard future opportunities to network.

No neighbour objections have been received in relation to environmental sustainability issues.

The specifications set out in the sustainability statement are considered by the council's appointed sustainability consultant to be appropriate and in accordance with policy 9 of the JCS and allows for the partial discharge at this stage of condition 23 (addressing of environmental sustainability issues) of the variation to planning permission reference WP/16/00271/VAR.

Waste Management Facilities Strategy Condition 4 (A) (c) of variation to planning permission reference WP/16/00271/VAR seeks details of a waste management facilities strategy and waste audit, including arrangements for the provision of waste collection receptacles.

The application was accompanied by a design code compliance statement which includes a section on refuse collection strategy (page 34). A refuse management plan is shown on drawing number PWEL MCB ZZ ZZ DR A 0234 D5 Rev P3 (refuse strategy plan) showing bin stores, communal bin stores, communal collection points and drag collection distances. Drawing number GPWEL MCB ZZ ZZ DR A 0190 D5 Rev P1 (bins and bike store) shows floor and elevation plans of a communal bin store.

The layout has been designed to accommodate the local authority refuse collection requirements. Three storey grouped apartments will be provided with communal refuse storage space that could accommodate the required containers. The storage would be secure and would be either integrated into the design of the apartment building or detached building located within close walking proximity to the associated apartments.

The houses would be provided with refuse containers to meet the BCW requirements and each dwelling has been provided with a designated bin storage area in each rear garden. Residents of houses adjacent to the highway would leave their wheeled bins adjacent to the public footway for collection on the appropriate day.

Residents of houses accessed from private driveways, mews and lanes without turning provision would place their bins at pre-determined collection points adjacent to the adoptable highway on the appropriate day. These are identified on the refuse management plan and would be approved as part of this reserved matters application. The application was also accompanied by refuse vehicle tracking shown on Stantec drawing numbers 47831/2001/100/006 Rev B (North Wellingborough parcel R10 swept path analysis) and 47831/2001/100/007 Rev B (North Wellingborough parcel R10 swept

Planning Committee 76 of 131 3 February 2021

path analysis) which demonstrates that refuse vehicle could manoeuvre in the turning heads, entering and leaving the local routes in a forward gear. Northamptonshire highways have raised no objections to the refuse vehicle tracking plans.

No neighbour objections have been received in relation to a refuse strategy.

The specifications set out in the waste management facilities strategy and waste audit, including arrangements for the provision of waste collection receptacles are considered by Northamptonshire highways to be appropriate and allows for the partial discharge at this stage of condition 4 (A) (c) (waste collection strategy) of the variation to planning permission reference WP/16/00271/VAR.

Proposed ground and finished floor levels Condition 4 (A) (b) of variation to planning permission reference WP/16/00271/VAR seeks details of any proposed alterations to existing ground levels, the final ground level of the development and the finished floor levels of the buildings.

There is currently a difference in levels across the site, which will result in cut and fill taking place across the site to reduce the overall difference in levels. The application was accompanied by proposed finished floor plans, external levels and road contours shown on Stantec drawing number 47831/2001/600/001 Rev E (North Wellingborough parcel R10 finished floor levels). The proposed finished floor plans, external levels and road contours are considered by officers to be acceptable for the site and will result in more gradual changes in levels than occurs currently.

No neighbour objections have been received in relation to the proposed finished floor plans, external levels and road contours.

The proposed finished floor plans, external levels and road contours are considered to be appropriate and allows for the partial discharge at this stage of condition 4 (A) (b) (proposed finished floor plans, external levels and road contours) of the variation to planning permission reference WP/16/00271/VAR.

Conditions The revised NPPF at paragraph 56 requires conditions to only be imposed where they are: necessary, relevant to planning and to the development to be permitted, enforceable, precise and reasonable in all other respects. The PPG re-iterates this advice.

It is considered that the proposed conditions meet the tests set out in the NPPF and the provisions of the PPG.

It is considered that the recommended heads of terms and the conditions meet the tests set out in the revised NPPF and the PPG.

CONCLUSION It is recommended that reserved matter consent should be approved in relation to access, scale, appearance, layout and landscaping subject to the conditions set out below. Conditions 4(a), 4 (b), 4 (c), 4 (A) (a), 4 (A) (b), 4(A) (c), 5, 6, 10, 11, 15, 16, 19, 20, 23, 27, 31, 32 and 33 can be partially discharged.

Planning Committee 77 of 131 3 February 2021

RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that reserved matter consent should be approved in relation to access, scale, appearance, layout and landscaping subject to the conditions set out below. Conditions 4(a), 4 (b), 4 (c), 4 (A) (a), 4 (A) (b), 4(A) (c), 5, 6, 10, 11, 15, 16, 19, 20, 23, 27, 31, 32 and 33 can be partially discharged.

CONDITIONS/REASONS

1. The development hereby approved shall be carried out in accordance with the following drawings/details: MCL013/001 (R10a application site boundary) received 27 November 2020; MCL013/002 (R10a site location plan) received 27 November 2020; GPWEL MCB ZZ ZZ DR A 0230 D5 Rev P8 (site layout plan) received 14 January 2021 (condition 4(a) and 4(b)); GPWEL MCB ZZ ZZ DR A 0231 D5 Rev P3 (external materials and boundary treatment plan) received 14 January 2021 (condition 4(a) and 4(c)); GPWEL MCB ZZ ZZ DR A 0232 D5 Rev P3 (surfacing materials) received 14 January 2021 (condition 4(a) and 4(b)); GPWEL MCB ZZ ZZ DR A 0233 D5 Rev P7 (tenure plan) received 14 January 2021 (S106 agreement); PWEL MCB ZZ ZZ DR A 0234 D5 Rev P3 (refuse strategy plan) received 14 January 2021 (condition 4A(c)); PWEL MCB ZZ ZZ DR A 0235 D5 Rev P3 (parking strategy plan) received 14 January 2021 (condition 4(b)); GPWEL MCB ZZ ZZ DR A 0105 D5 Rev P2 (housetype elevations & elevations T3_ Detailing 3 plot 43 handed) received 27 November 2020 (condition 4 (a); GPWEL MCB ZZ ZZ DR A 0106 D5 Rev P2 (housetype elevations & elevations T4_ Detailing 3 plots 36,76,148 as shown and plots 37, 77 handed received 27 November 2020 (condition 4 (a); GPWEL MCB ZZ ZZ DR A 0108 D5 Rev P3 (housetype elevations & elevations T5_ Detailing 3 plots 32, 34,38,74 as shown and plots 33,35,39,75 handed received 27 November 2020 (condition 4 (a); GPWEL MCB ZZ ZZ DR A 0110 D5 Rev P2 (housetype elevations & elevations T5_ Detailing 2 plot 107 handed received 27 November 2020 (condition 4 (a); GPWEL MCB ZZ ZZ DR A 0112 D5 Rev P3 (housetype elevations & elevations T6 Detailing 3 plot 55,67, 78,79,96 as shown and plots 56,68,69,80 handed) received 27 November 2020 (condition 4 (a); GPWEL MCB ZZ ZZ DR A 0116 D5 Rev P2 (housetype elevations & elevations T7 Detailing 3 plot 29 as shown received 27 November 2020 (condition 4 (a); GPWEL MCB ZZ ZZ DR A 0118 D5 Rev P3 (housetype elevations & elevations T8 Detailing 3 plots 45,65,103 as shown and plots 46,66,102 handed) received 27 November 2020 (condition 4 (a); GPWEL MCB ZZ ZZ DR A 0120 D5 Rev P2 (housetype elevations & elevations T8 A_Detailing 3 plot 140 as shown and plots 30,31,41,89,97,143,147 handed) received 27 November 2020 (condition 4 (a); GPWEL MCB ZZ ZZ DR A 0121 D5 Rev P2 (housetype elevations & elevations T8 B_Detailing 3 plots 98 as shown and plots 40, 42, 85 handed) received 27 November 2020 (condition 4 (a); GPWEL MCB ZZ ZZ DR A 0124 D5 Rev P2 (housetype elevations & elevations T8 B_Detailing 1 plots 90 as shown and plots 86, 99 handed) received 27 November

Planning Committee 78 of 131 3 February 2021

2020 (condition 4 (a); GPWEL MCB ZZ ZZ DR A 0125 D5 Rev P2 (housetype elevations & elevations T9_Detailing 2 plots 111,115,120,125 as shown and plots 114, 119, 124 handed) received 27 November 2020 (condition 4 (a); GPWEL MCB ZZ ZZ DR A 0126 D5 Rev P2 (housetype elevations & elevations T10 Detailing 3 plots 49,70 as shown and plots 50,71 handed) received 27 November 2020 (condition 4 (a); GPWEL MCB ZZ ZZ DR A 0127 D5 Rev P2 (housetype elevations & elevations T10_Gable_Detailing 3 plot 142 as shown, plot 141 handed) received 27 November 2020 (condition 4 (a); GPWEL MCB ZZ ZZ DR A 0128 D5 Rev P2 (housetype elevations & elevations T10_ Gable_Detailing 2 plot 113 as shown as shown and plots 112 handed) received 27 November 2020 (condition 4 (a); GPWEL MCB ZZ ZZ DR A 0129 D5 Rev P2 (housetype elevations & elevations T11 A_Detailing 3 plot 44 as shown) received 27 November 2020 (condition 4 (a); GPWEL MCB ZZ ZZ DR A 0130 D5 Rev P2 (housetype elevations & elevations T11 B_Detailing 3 plot 84 as shown) received 27 November 2020 (condition 4 (a); GPWEL MCB ZZ ZZ DR A 0131 D5 Rev P2 (housetype elevations & elevations T11 B_Detailing 1 plot 87 handed) received 27 November 2020 (condition 4 (a); GPWEL MCB ZZ ZZ DR A 0132 D5 Rev P2 (housetype elevations & elevations T12_Detailing 3 plots 88, 95 handed) received 27 November 2020(condition 4 (a); GPWEL MCB ZZ ZZ DR A 0133 D5 Rev P1 (housetype elevations & elevations T6_Gable_Detailing 2 plots 117,118,123,127,128 as shown & plots 116, 126 handed) received 27 November 2020 (condition 4 (a); GPWEL MCB ZZ ZZ DR A 0134 D5 Rev P1 (housetype plans & elevations T8 B_Detailing 2 plot 28 as shown received 27 November 2020 (condition 4 (a); GPWEL MCB ZZ ZZ DR A 0150 D5 Rev P2 (housetype plans T1 + T2 plots 6-11 as shown & plots 12-17 handed) received 27 November 2020 (condition 4 (a); GPWEL MCB ZZ ZZ DR A 0151 D5 Rev P2 (housetype elevations T1 + T1_plots 6- 11 as shown & plots 12-17 handed) received 27 November 2020 (condition 4 (a); GPWEL MCB ZZ ZZ DR A 0152 D5 Rev P3 (housetype plans T1 B+T2_plots 18-23 as shown) received 27 November 2020 (condition 4 (a); GPWEL MCB ZZ ZZ DR A 0153 D5 Rev P2 (housetype plans T1 B+T2_plots 18-23 as shown) received 27 November 2020 (condition 4 (a); GPWEL MCB ZZ ZZ DR A 0154 D5 Rev P3 (housetype elevations T1 B+T2_plots 18-23 as shown) received 27 November 2020 (condition 4 (a); GPWEL MCB ZZ ZZ DR A 0155 D5 Rev P2 (housetype plans T1 & T2_plots 1-5 handed) received 27 November 2020 (condition 4 (a); GPWEL MCB ZZ ZZ DR A 0156 D5 Rev P2 (housetype elevations T1 & T2_plots 1-5 handed) received 27 November 2020 (condition 4 (a); GPWEL MCB ZZ ZZ DR A 0160 D5 Rev P2 (housetype plans & elevations T4_Detailing 3 _Affordable plot 51 as shown and plot 52 handed) received 27 November 2020 (condition 4 (a); GPWEL MCB ZZ ZZ DR A 0162 D5 Rev P2 (housetype plans & elevations T5_Detailing 2 _Affordable plot 130 as shown) received 27 November 2020 (condition 4 (a); GPWEL MCB ZZ ZZ DR A 0163 D5 Rev P2 (housetype plans & elevations T5_Gable_Detailing 2_Affordable plots 108 as shown and plots 129 handed) received 27 November 2020 (condition 4 (a); GPWEL MCB ZZ ZZ DR A 0164 D5 Rev P2 (housetype plans & elevations T6_Detailing 3 _Affordable plots 59,63,72,82,93,105,145 as shown and plots

Planning Committee 79 of 131 3 February 2021

60,64,73,94,104 handed) 27 November 2020 (condition 4 (a); GPWEL MCB ZZ ZZ DR A 0165 D5 Rev P2 (housetype plans & elevations T6_Gable_Detailing 3 _Affordable plots 146 as shown and plots 144 handed) received 27 November 2020 (condition 4 (a); GPWEL MCB ZZ ZZ DR A 0167 D5 Rev P2 (housetype plans & elevations T7_Detailing 3 _Affordable plots 135,137,139 as shown and plots 136,138 handed) 27 November 2020 (condition 4 (a); GPWEL MCB ZZ ZZ DR A 0168 D5 Rev P2 (housetype plans & elevations T7_Gable_Detailing 3 _Affordable plot 134 handed) received 27 November 2020 (condition 4 (a); GPWEL MCB ZZ ZZ DR A 0169 D5 Rev P3 (housetype plans & elevations T8_Detailing 3 _Affordable plots 53,57 as shown and plots 54,58, 132 handed) received 27 November 2020 (condition 4 (a); GPWEL MCB ZZ ZZ DR A 0170 D5 Rev P2 (housetype plans & elevations T8A_Detailing 3 _Affordable plot 133 as shown and plots 100 handed) received 27 November 2020 (condition 4 (a); GPWEL MCB ZZ ZZ DR A 0171 D5 Rev P2 (housetype plans & elevations T8_Detailing 2 _Affordable plot 26 as shown and plot 27 handed) received 27 November 2020 (condition 4 (a); GPWEL MCB ZZ ZZ DR A 0172 D5 Rev P2 (housetype plans & elevations T8A_Detailing 2 _Affordable plot 131 as shown and plot 106 handed) received 27 November 2020 (condition 4 (a); GPWEL MCB ZZ ZZ DR A 0173 D5 Rev P2 (housetype plans & elevations T9_Detailing 2 _Affordable plot 110 as shown and plot 109 handed) received 27 November 2020 (condition 4 (a); GPWEL MCB ZZ ZZ DR A 0175 D5 Rev P1 (housetype plans & elevations T5_Detailing 3 _Affordable plots 101 as shown) received 27 November 2020 (condition 4 (a); GPWEL MCB ZZ ZZ DR A 0176 D5 Rev P1 (housetype plans & elevations T6_Gable_Detailing 2 _Affordable plot 122 as shown and plot 121 handed) received 27 November 2020 (condition 4 (a); GPWEL MCB ZZ ZZ DR A 0177 D5 Rev P2 (housetype plans & elevations T7_Detailing 2 _Affordable plots 23,24 as shown and plot 25 handed) received 27 November 2020 (condition 4 (a); GPWEL MCB ZZ ZZ DR A 0180 D5 Rev P2 (housetype plans & elevations T13_Detailing 3 _Affordable plot 47 as shown and plot 48 handed) received 27 November 2020 (condition 4 (a); GPWEL MCB ZZ ZZ DR A 0181 D5 Rev P2 (housetype plans & elevations T13_Gable_Affordable plot 61 as shown and plot 62 handed) received 27 November 2020 (condition 4 (a); GPWEL MCB ZZ ZZ DR A 0182 D5 Rev P1 (housetype plans & elevations T6_Gable_Detailing 1_Affordable plot 92 as shown and plots 91 handed) 27 November 2020 (condition 4 (a); GPWEL MCB ZZ ZZ DR A 0183 D5 Rev P1 (housetype plans & elevations T8_Gable_Detailing 3_Affordable plot 81 as shown and plot 83 handed) 27 November 2020 (condition 4 (a); GPWEL MCB ZZ ZZ DR A 0190 D5 Rev P1 (plans and elevations of bins and bike stores) received 27 November 2020 (condition 4 (a); GPWEL MCB ZZ ZZ DR A 0300 D5 Rev P1 (housetype plans T1 NDSS Compliance) received 27 November 2020 (condition 31); GPWEL MCB ZZ ZZ DR A 0306 D5 Rev P1 (housetype plans T4_Affordable NDSS

Planning Committee 80 of 131 3 February 2021

Compliance) received 27 November 2020 (condition 31); GPWEL MCB ZZ ZZ DR A 0301 D5 Rev P1 (housetype plans T1B NDSS Compliance) received 27 November 2020 (condition 31); GPWEL MCB ZZ ZZ DR A 0302 D5 Rev P1 (housetype plans T2 NDSS Compliance) received 27 November 2020 (condition 31); GPWEL MCB ZZ ZZ DR A 0303 D5 Rev P1 (housetype plans T3 NDSS Compliance) received 27 November 2020 (condition 31); GPWEL MCB ZZ ZZ DR A 0304 D5 Rev P1 (housetype plans T4 M4 (2) Compliance) received 27 November 2020 (condition 32); GPWEL MCB ZZ ZZ DR A 0305 D5 Rev P1 (housetype plans T4 NDSS Compliance) received 27 November 2020 (condition 31); GPWEL MCB ZZ ZZ DR A 0306 D5 Rev P1 (housetype plans T4_Affordable NDSS Compliance) received 27 November 2020 (condition 31); GPWEL MCB ZZ ZZ DR A 0307 D5 Rev P1 (housetype plans T5 M4 (2) Compliance) received 27 November 2020 (condition 32); GPWEL MCB ZZ ZZ DR A 0308 D5 Rev P1 (housetype plans T5 NDSS Compliance) received 27 November 2020 (condition 31); GPWEL MCB ZZ ZZ DR A 0309 D5 Rev P1 (housetype plans T5_Affordable NDSS Compliance) received 27 November 2020 (condition 31); GPWEL MCB ZZ ZZ DR A 0310 D5 Rev P1 (housetype plans T6 M4(2) Compliance) received 27 November 2020 (condition 32); GPWEL MCB ZZ ZZ DR A 0311 D5 Rev P1 (housetype plans T6 NDSS Compliance) received 27 November 2020 (condition 31); GPWEL MCB ZZ ZZ DR A 0312 D5 Rev P1 (housetype plans T6_Affordable NDSS Compliance) received 27 November 2020 (condition 31); GPWEL MCB ZZ ZZ DR A 0313 D5 Rev P1 (housetype plans T7_Affordable M4 (2) Compliance) received 27 November 2020 (condition 32); GPWEL MCB ZZ ZZ DR A 0314 D5 Rev P1 (housetype plans T7 NDSS Compliance) received 27 November 2020 (condition 31); GPWEL MCB ZZ ZZ DR A 0315 D5 Rev P1 (housetype plans T7_Affordable NDSS Compliance) received 27 November 2020 (condition 31); GPWEL MCB ZZ ZZ DR A 0316 D5 Rev P1 (housetype plans T8_NDSS Compliance) received 27 November 2020 (condition 31); GPWEL MCB ZZ ZZ DR A 0317 D5 Rev P2 (housetype plans T8_Affordable M4 (2) Compliance) received 8 December 2020 (condition 32); GPWEL MCB ZZ ZZ DR A 0318 D5 Rev P1 (housetype plans T8_Affordable NDSS Compliance) received 27 November 2020 (condition 31); GPWEL MCB ZZ ZZ DR A 0319 D5 Rev P1 (housetype plans T8 A/B NDSS Compliance) received 27 November 2020 (condition 31); GPWEL MCB ZZ ZZ DR A 0320 D5 Rev P1 (housetype plans T8 A/B_Affordable NDSS Compliance) received 27 November 2020 (condition 31); GPWEL MCB ZZ ZZ DR A 0321 D5 Rev P1 (housetype plans T9 NDSS Compliance) received 27 November 2020 (condition 31); GPWEL MCB ZZ ZZ DR A 0322 D5 Rev P1 (housetype plans T9_Affordable NDSS Compliance) received 27 November 2020 (condition 31); GPWEL MCB ZZ ZZ DR A 0323 D5 Rev P1 (housetype plans T10 NDSS Compliance) received 27 November 2020 (condition 31); GPWEL MCB ZZ ZZ DR A 0324 D5 Rev P1 (housetype plans T11 A/B NDSS Compliance) received 27 November 2020 (condition 31); GPWEL MCB ZZ ZZ DR A 0325 D5 Rev P1 (housetype plans T12 NDSS Compliance) received 27 November 2020 (condition 31);

Planning Committee 81 of 131 3 February 2021

GPWEL MCB ZZ ZZ DR A 0326 D5 Rev P1 (housetype plans T10_Affordable NDSS Compliance) received 27 November 2020 (condition 31); CSA 4935 100 Rev B (soft landscape proposals sheet 1 of 3) received 14 January 2021 (condition 4 (c)); CSA 4935 101 Rev B (soft landscape proposals sheet 2 of 3) received 14 January 2021 (condition 4 (c)); CSA 4935 102 Rev B (soft landscape proposals sheet 3 of 3) received 14 January 2021 (condition 4 (c); Lockhart Garratt Arboricultural Impact Assessment Glenvale Park (Parcel R10A), Wellingborough reference 20-4246 Version 2 dated 12 November 2019 received 27 November 2020 (conditions 4 (c) and 11); 3595/01/20-4332 (tree constraints plan -overview) received 27 November 2020 (condition 11); 3595/01/20-4332 (tree constraints plan -plan 2) received 27 November 2020 (condition 11); 3595/01/20-4244 (arboricultural impact plan -site overview) received 27 November 2020 (condition 11); 3595/01/20-4245 (tree protection plan -site overview) received 27 November 2020 (condition 11); PBA 27391/009 Rev A (North Wellingborough flood plains) dated 02.05.2014 received 27 November 2020 (condition 20); PBA 27391/500/002 Rev D (North Wellingborough strategic surface water drainage drainage strategy) dated 30.06.2014 received 27 November 2020 (condition 20); PBA 27391/500/003 Rev I (North Wellingborough detailed design highway access drainage layout sheet 3 of 4) dated 19.03.2018 received 27 November 2020; PBA 27391/500/014 Rev F (North Wellingborough phase 1 infrastructure flood plains sheet 1 of 2) dated 19.03.2018 received 27 November 2020 (condition 20); PBA 27391/500/016 Rev F (North Wellingborough phase 1 infrastructure flood flow analysis) dated 19.03.2020 received 27 November 2020 (condition 20); Stantec technical note 47831 TN001 Rev A North Wellingborough parcel R10A surface water drainage and flood risk dated 14.01.2021 (35 pages) received 14 January 2021 (condition 20); Stantec Technical Note Appendix G Microdrainage calculations (13 pages) dated 29.09.2020 received 27 November 2020 (condition 20); Stantec 47831/2001/100/001 Rev B (North Wellingborough parcel R10 general arrangement) dated 14.01.2021 received 14 January 2021 (condition 4 (b)); Stantec 47831/2001/100/002 Rev B (North Wellingborough parcel R10 visibilities) dated 14.01.2021 received 14 January 2021 (condition 4 (b)); Stantec 47831/2001/100/003 Rev C (North Wellingborough parcel R10 adoption strategy) dated 14.01.2021 received 14 January 2021 (condition 4 (b)); Stantec 47831/2001/100/004 Rev B (North Wellingborough parcel R10 existing levels) dated 14.01.2021 received 14 January 2021 (condition 4 A(b)); Stantec 47831/2001/100/006 Rev B (North Wellingborough parcel R10 swept path analysis) dated 14.01.2021 received 14 January 2021 (condition 4 (b)); Stantec 47831/2001/100/007 Rev B (North Wellingborough parcel R10 swept path analysis) dated 14.01.2021 received 14 January 2021 (condition 4 (b)); Stantec 47831/2001/500/001 Rev E (North Wellingborough parcel R10 drainage layout) dated 14.01.2021 received 14 January 2021 (conditions 4 (b), 19 and 20); Stantec 47831/2001/600/001 Rev E (North Wellingborough parcel R10 finished floor levels) dated 28.09.2020 received 14 January 2021 (condition 4A (b); Stantec 47831/2001/1300/001 Rev B (North Wellingborough parcel R10 street

Planning Committee 82 of 131 3 February 2021

lighting) dated 30.10.2020 received 14 January 2021 (condition 16); GPWEL-MCB-XX-XX-DA-A-0010-D5-P5 LHG60757 Design Code Compliance Statement for Glenvale Park Parcel R10 (a), Wellingborough by McBains dated September 2020 received 27 November 2020 (condition 6); Noise Impact Assessment, Glenvlae Park by BWB Consulting reference MCA2105- 001 Version 2 dated 08.07.2020 received 27 November 2020 (condition 14); Stantec 49986 - North Wellingborough Parcel R10A lighting strategy dated October 2020 received 27 November 2020 (condition 16); Sustainability Statement for R10(a) Glenvale Park dated 24 September 2020 version 1 by environmental economics (16 pages) received 27 November 2020 (conditions 23 and 33); Stantec 27391/2001 REV A - North Wellingborough Parcel R10A construction environmental management plan dated January 2021 received 14 January 2021 (19 pages) (condition 15); 47831/2001/100/008 - Construction Traffic Management Plan received 14 January 2021 (condition 15); 60757 Accommodation Schedule with tenure for parcel R10a, Glenvale Park dated 07.01.2020 (site layout plan P8) received 15 January 2021 (condition 31);

Reason: To define the permission and to conform with the requirements of The Town and Country Planning (General Development Procedure) (Amendment No. 3) (England) Order 2009.

2. Prior to the first occupation in any parcel or phase details of full engineering, drainage, street lighting and constructional details of the streets proposed for adoption have been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The development shall, thereafter, be constructed in accordance with the approved details, unless an alternative timetable is otherwise agreed in writing with the local planning authority.

Reason: In the interest of highway safety; to ensure a satisfactory appearance to the highways infrastructure serving the approved development; and to safeguard the visual amenities of the locality and users of the highway in accordance with policies 8 (b) (i) and 8 (b) (ii) of the North Northamptonshire Joint Core Strategy.

3. No dwelling or dwellings shall be occupied until the estate street affording access to those dwelling(s) within the reserved matters area has been completed to wearing course.

Reasons: To ensure that the streets serving the development are completed and maintained to the approved standard, and are available for use by the occupants, and other users of the development, in the interest of highway safety in accordance with policies 8 (b) (i) and 8 (b) (ii) of the North Northamptonshire Joint Core Strategy.

4. No dwellings shall be occupied until details of the proposed arrangements for future management and maintenance of the proposed streets within the development have been submitted to and approved by the local planning authority. The streets shall thereafter be maintained in accordance with the approved management and maintenance details until such time as an agreement has been entered into under section 38 of the Highways Act 1980 or a private management and Maintenance Company has been established.

Planning Committee 83 of 131 3 February 2021

Reason: To ensure satisfactory development of the site and to ensure estate roads are managed and maintained thereafter to a suitable and safe standard in accordance with policy 8 (b) (ii) of the North Northamptonshire Joint Core Strategy.

5. All hard and soft landscape works shown on drawing numbers CSA 4935 100 Rev B (soft landscape proposals sheet 1 of 3) received 14 January 2021; CSA 4935 101 Rev B (soft landscape proposals sheet 2 of 3) received 14 January 2021 and CSA 4935 102 Rev B (soft landscape proposals sheet 3 of 3) received 14 January 2021 shall be carried out in the first planting season following the occupation of the associated and relevant individual dwelling in that phase or such other details that shall have been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority and thereafter retained in that form. If within a period of five years from the date of the planting of any tree or shrub, that tree or shrub, or any tree and shrub planted in replacement for it, is removed, uprooted or destroyed, dies, becomes severely damaged or diseased, shall be replaced in the next planting season with trees and shrubs of equivalent size, species and quantity.

Reason: To protect the appearance and character of the area and to minimise the effect of development on the area in accordance with policy 3 (a), (b) and (e) of the North Northamptonshire Joint Core Strategy.

6. The boundary treatment details for each dwelling shown on drawing number GPWEL MCB ZZ ZZ DR A 0231 D5 Rev P3 (external materials and boundary treatment plan) received 14 January 2021 shall be installed or such other details that shall have been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority and thereafter retained in that form prior to the occupation of the relevant individual dwelling.

Reason: To reduce opportunities for crime and aid security in accordance with policy 8 (e) (iv) of the North Northamptonshire Joint Core Strategy.

7. No development above slab level shall take place until samples of external facing bricks, the external boarding, the roof tiles, the window frames, fascia boards and guttering to be used in the construction of the dwellings have been submitted and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The development shall thereafter be carried out in accordance with the approved details.

Reason: In the interest of the visual amenity of the area in accordance with policy 8 (d) (i) of the North Northamptonshire Joint Core Strategy.

8. The relevant dwelling shall not be occupied until the associated refuse store, and or facilities allocated for storing of recyclable materials, as shown drawing numbers PWEL MCB ZZ ZZ DR A 0234 D5 Rev P3 (refuse strategy plan) received 14 January 2021 and GPWEL MCB ZZ ZZ DR A 0190 D5 Rev P1 (bins and bike store) received 27 November 2020 has been completed in accordance with the approved plans or such other details that shall have been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority and thereafter retained in that form. Thereafter, all refuse and recyclable materials associated with the development shall either be stored within this dedicated store/area, as shown on the approved plans, or internally within the building(s) that form part of the application site.

Planning Committee 84 of 131 3 February 2021

Reason: To safeguard the amenity of the occupiers of adjoining premises, protect the general environment, and prevent obstruction to pedestrian movement, and to ensure that there are adequate facilities for the storage and recycling of recoverable materials in accordance with policy 8 (b) (ii) of the North Northamptonshire Joint Core Strategy.

9. No building hereby permitted shall be occupied until the associated car/vehicle parking area shown on drawing number PWEL MCB ZZ ZZ DR A 0235 D5 Rev P3 (parking strategy plan) received 14 January 2021 has been constructed, surfaced and permanently marked out or such other details that shall have been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority and thereafter retained in that form. The car parking area provided shall be used for no other purpose thereafter.

Reason: To ensure adequate parking provision at all times so that the development does not prejudice the free flow of traffic or the safety on the neighbouring highway in accordance with policy 8 (b) (ii) of the North Northamptonshire Joint Core Strategy.

10. Prior to the commencement of the construction of any dwellings details of the proposed lighting scheme for the lighting of the shared private driveways and shared parking courts shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The scheme shall include details of the lux levels of each light and a plan showing the position, type and extent of the lighting over the area to be lit. The approved scheme shall be implemented prior to the first occupation of the associated dwelling and shall be retained in that form thereafter or such other details that shall have been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority and thereafter retained in that form.

Reason: To ensure that there is adequate lighting over the associated private driveways and to reduce the fear of crime through the creation of a safe environment and accord with policy 8 (e) (iv) of the North Northamptonshire Joint Core Strategy.

11. Prior to the construction of the development above slab in level in each phase a scheme for the provision of charging points for electric vehicles shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The scheme shall identify the dwellings in each phase that will benefit from a charging point for electric vehicles and the location of any charging point for electric vehicles. The scheme shall be implemented prior to the first occupation of each dwelling on that phase to which the charging point shall relate.

Reason: To negate the effects of the development on local air quality and accord with advice contained within 110 (e) of the National Planning Policy Framework.

12. Prior to any construction work commencing on site the environmental noise impact assessment shall be reviewed and a report shall be submitted to and approved by the local planning authority. The review should assume that traffic noise mitigation is provided as part of the proposed IWIMP road scheme. Where necessary the report shall include proposals to mitigate any observed adverse effects due to noise on the health and quality of life of the future residents. If it is found that it will be necessary to rely on closed windows to achieve satisfactory internal noise levels, then an assessment of the risk of overheating together with proposals for providing adequate cooling ventilation should also be submitted for approval. The assessment shall be

Planning Committee 85 of 131 3 February 2021

carried out by a competent person and where appropriate have regard to the following guidance; - Professional Practice Guidance, ProPG: Planning & Noise - New Residential Development - British Standard, BS8233:2014 - British Standard, BS4142:2014 - World Health Organisation, Community Noise Guidelines - Acoustics Ventilation and Overheating - Residential Design Guide The approved scheme shall be implemented prior to the first occupation of any associated dwelling.

Reason: In the interests of the future occupiers amenities in relation to traffic noise and to ensure a suitable mitigation measures are agreed to prevent overheating and ensure adequate cooling ventilation are provided to accord with policy 8 (e) (ii) of the North Northamptonshire Joint Core Strategy.

13. Notwithstanding the details shown on drawing number GPWEL MCB ZZ ZZ DR A 0232 D5 Rev P3 (surfacing materials) received 14 January 2021 no development shall take place above slab level until samples of the two block paving materials to be used in the areas of hardstanding within the development hereby permitted have been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The development shall thereafter be carried out in accordance with the approved details.

Reason: To protect the character and appearance of the area and to minimise the effect of development on the area in accordance with policy 8 (d) (ii) of the North Northamptonshire Joint Core Strategy.

14. Details and design of the balconies proposed serving plots 1-22 inclusive shall be submitted to and be approved in writing by the local planning authority before the relevant parts of the work are commenced. This should have regard for crime prevention and 'Secured by Design' principles. The development shall be completed in accordance with the approved scheme before the relevant associated dwelling is first occupied.

Reason: To design out crime and promote the well-being in the area. In accordance with policy 8 (e) (iv) of the North Northamptonshire Joint Core Strategy

INFORMATIVE/S 1. In accordance with the provisions in the Town and Country Planning (Development Management Procedure) (England) Order 2015 and pursuant to paragraph 38 of the National Planning Policy Framework, where possible and feasible, either through discussions, negotiations or in the consideration and assessment of this application and the accompanying proposals, the council as the local planning authority endeavoured to work with the applicant/developer in a positive and proactive way to ensure that the approved development is consistent with the relevant provisions in the framework. 2. The Borough Council of Wellingborough encourages all contractors to be 'considerate contractors' when working in our district by being aware of the needs of neighbours and the environment. Prior to the commencement of any site works, it is good practice to notify neighbouring occupiers of the nature and duration of works to be undertaken.

Planning Committee 86 of 131 3 February 2021

To limit the potential detriment of construction works on residential amenity, it is recommended that all works and ancillary operations which are audible at the site boundary during construction should be carried out only between the following hours: 0800 hours and 1800 hours on Mondays to Fridays and 0800 and 1300 hours on Saturdays and at no time on Sundays and Bank Holidays. 3. The Public Health Act 1875 Town Improvement Clauses Act 1847 at S.64. Prior to occupation of the newly created premises(s), the street numbering for this development or conversion - residential and commercial, must be agreed with the Street Naming and Numbering Officer. When issued, the number allocated must be clearly displayed on the outside of the property. Application forms for Street Naming and Numbering are available at www.wellingborough.gov.uk 4. You are reminded that this consent must be read in conjunction with planning permission WP/16/00271/VAR of which forms a part and is subject to pre- commencement conditions, the details of which are required to be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority before any development may lawfully commence. 5. The approval hereby given relates to the approval of reserved matters, as required under 1 of the outline planning permission granted under reference WP/16/00271/VAR. The applicants attention is drawn to the fact that this reserved matters consent also confirms that details submitted in relation to the outline planning permission (as listed in condition 1) specifically conditions 4 (a), 4(b), 4(c), 4 (A) (a), 4 (A) (b), 4 (A) (c), 5, 6, 10, 11, 15, 16, 19, 20, 23, 27, 31, 32 and 33 are formally partially discharged. This does not fully discharge condition numbers 4 (a), 4(b), 4(c), 4 (A) (a), 4 (A) (b), 4 (A) (c), 5, 6, 10, 11, 15, 16, 19, 20, 23, 27, 31, 32 and 33 at this stage which are subject to the development being carried out in accordance with the details approved by the local planning authority. There is no legal requirement for the developer to obtain confirmation of discharge of conditions beyond this approval. However, if the developer requires the Council's confirmation, he may apply afresh (subject to the planning fee applicable at the time) for confirmation that one or more planning conditions has been complied with. 6. The applicant is advised that to discharge condition 4 above the local planning authority requires a copy of the completed agreement between the applicant and the local highway authority under Section 38, Highways Act 1980 or the constitution and details of a Private Management and Maintenance Company confirming funding, management and maintenance regimes. 7. All gas fired boilers should meet a minimum standard of 40 mgNOx/Kwh.

Planning Committee 87 of 131 3 February 2021

BOROUGH COUNCIL OF WELLINGBOROUGH

Planning Committee 3 February 2021

Report of the Principal Planning Manager

Extension of time (if applicable): 7 January 2021

Case Officer Ms Susan Garbutt WP/20/00648/FUL

Date received Date valid Overall Expiry Ward Parish 9 October 2020 9 October 2020 4 December 2020 Bozeat Bozeat

Applicant Ms Ruth Taylor

Agent Mr Ian Leighton

Location Dungee Corner Harrold Road Bozeat Wellingborough Northamptonshire NN29 7LP

Proposal Construction of a new dwelling, new vehicular access, boundary treatments and landscaping under paragraph 79 NPPF - additional plans

PLANNING HISTORY WP/19/00326/PNX Prior approval not required with conditions 09.07.2019 Notification for Prior Approval for a Proposed Larger Home Extension for demolition of rear single storey projection and two single storey rear extensions WP/16/00670/FUL Refused (APPEAL DISMISSED 31/12/18 – Council 04.10.2017 appeal ref 18/00008/REF, appeal ref: APP/H2835/W/18/3194108) Erection of a single dwelling and formation of vehicular access WR/1963/0213 Permitted development 31.10.1963 Proposed bay window

Reason(s) for committee consideration

- The Principal Planning Manager has requested the planning application is determined by committee

THE SITE AND SURROUNDINGS The application site is a rectangular parcel of land 2.4 hectares in size. The site is garden land for the adjacent dwelling Dungee Corner, located to the east, and has previously been used as an orchard. The site currently has no vehicular access. The site abuts the road verge of Harrold Road to the south, the remaining garden of Dungee Corner to the east. The boundary between the site and remaining garden is not well

Planning Committee 88 of 131 3 February 2021

WP/20/00648/FUL

D e f

Dungee Plantation A

E 102.3m

103.8m E E E

D R U ,

N C G o

E C E o

R n s O t , A U D A

D & e C f 104.8m P

B d E y

104.2m E

Pond

ICT Services © Crown Copyright and database right 2021. Scale: Ordnance Survey 100018694. Legend This map is accurate 1:1,600 Cities Revealed to the scale specified Aerial Photography copyright: when reproduced at A4 ± GetMapping PLC 1999 WP/20/00648/FUL Dungee Corner Harrold Road Bozeat

defined. The site abuts open countryside to the north and west and the boundary is defined by a 1.0 metre high post and wire fence. The site contains several trees and a belt of trees/hedgerow defines the southern boundary with the road. The site is relatively flat.

The site is located within open countryside, the nearest settlement being Bozeat approximately 2,100 metres to the west. The open countryside abutting the site to the north and west is a single field approximately 4.7 hectares in area identified as a SSSI 'Dungee Corner Meadow'. The field is lowland meadow; a traditionally managed hay meadow and grassland and includes varied grass species and Northamptonshire Biodiversity Records Centre (NBRC) notable protected species of flowering plants including rare orchid.

APPLICATION PROPOSAL AND BACKGROUND The proposal seeks planning permission for a single detached dwelling, with attached double garage. The proposal includes a new vehicular access from Harrold Road, boundary treatments and landscaping. The application is made under paragraph 79(e) of the NPPF.

The application follows a previous planning application for a dwelling on the site by the same applicant (reference WP/16/00670/FUL) which was refused by Planning Committee at the meeting held on 4 October 2017 and subsequently dismissed at appeal in December 2018 (see Appendix 1 for the appeal decision). Since the appeal decision, the applicant has sought further pre-application advice on the development of the site under paragraph 79 (e) (reference PRE/19/00099/PREF) and advice was given in writing by the local planning authority following a meeting on site and a written design review response from OPUN on the 13 January 2020 (see Appendix 2 for the advice letter and plans).

The development of a single dwelling on the site, to meet paragraph 79 (e) of the NPPF, has been considered by the OPUN design review team twice. OPUN is the accredited independent architectural review panel for the East Midlands Region. The first review was part of the pre-application advice process. A design was considered at a Design Review panel meeting in November 2019 and the OPUN letter dated 10/12/19 is referred to in the Council's pre-application advice letter. The design changed from the pre-application stage and a second desktop review of a revised design was undertaken in 2020 and a further letter from OPUN advising on the design is dated 7/8/20.

In addition to the design and layout plans the application is supported by the following;

- Design and Access Statement, Sustainability Statement, Planning Statement (October 2020) - Design and Access Statement, Sustainability Statement, Planning Statement (July 2020 - report submitted to Design Review) - Landscape Impact Assessment (June 2020) and revised Appendix L5 (January 2021) - Preliminary Ecological Survey (February 2020) - eDNA Survey for Great Crested Newts (June 2020) - Tree Survey, Impact Assessment and Method Statement (September 2020) - Tree Protection Plan - Tree Survey Constraints Plan

Planning Committee 89 of 131 3 February 2021

- Topographical Survey - Landscape Plan - Letter regarding design response to the desktop design review by OPUN (November 2020)

Further plans and details were requested from the agent with regards the design and materials of the development and these are discussed in the relevant sections below.

NATIONAL GUIDANCE, DEVELOPMENT PLAN POLICY AND SUPPLEMENTARY PLANNING DOCUMENTS/GUIDANCE National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) (19 February 2019) Planning Practice Guidance (PPG) National Design Guide (PPG) (September 2019)

North Northamptonshire Joint Core Strategy - Part 1 of the local plan (JCS) Policies: 1 (presumption in favour of sustainable development) 3 (landscape character) 4 (biodiversity and geodiversity) 5 (water environment, resources and flood risk management) 8 (North Northamptonshire place shaping principles) 9 (sustainable buildings and allowable solutions) 10 (provision of infrastructure) 11 (network of urban and rural areas) 13 (rural exceptions) 15 (well connected towns, villages and neighbourhoods) 19 (the delivery of green Infrastructure special policy areas) 26 (renewable energy) 28 (housing requirements and strategic opportunities) 29 (distribution of new homes) 30 (housing mix and tenure)

Plan for the Borough of Wellingborough - Part 2 of the local plan (PBW) Policies SS1 (villages) GI 1 (local green infrastructure corridors)

Neighbourhood plans: None applicable

Supplementary planning documents/guidance: Sustainable Design Biodiversity Trees on Development Sites Planning Out Crime in Northamptonshire Northamptonshire Parking Standards

SUMMARY OF REPLIES TO CONSULTATIONS/REPRESENTATIONS RECEIVED 1. Northamptonshire Highways - no objection subject to conditions. No objection on highway safety and capacity grounds. Conditions required regarding the vehicular crossing construction, agreement of works, driveway to be hard bound for the first 5

Planning Committee 90 of 131 3 February 2021

metres, drainage, parking to comply with standards (not including garage), garage dimensions. No impact upon a public right of way. No objection (29/12/20)

2. Parish Council - Objection. Concern regarding the safety of the access onto Harrold Road, in close proximity to the Dungee Corner junction. Due to the frequency of accidents at the junction, Bedford Borough Council has recently implemented additional safety measures, they should be consulted on the proposal. The scheme does not meet the criteria to quality under policy 13 or paragraph 79 of NPPF. The scheme fails to significantly enhance the immediate setting. The Landscape Impact Assessment states that there will only be a moderate positive impact in some circumstances. The building, gates and boundary treatment would prevent rather than allow worthwhile glimpses of the SSSI meadow, like the previous refused scheme. The scheme takes themes from more distant buildings, but is at odds with the character of the nearest/host property. The Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment does not assess the relationship between these two buildings. Request the application is determined at Planning committee.

Further comments received 16/1/21. Objection maintained. The additional visual impact information does not show the relationship between the host dwelling and the proposed scheme. Viewpoint 4 shows the view most commonly experienced by the public. This, along with the proposed solid gates show the scheme would detract from its immediate setting rather than significantly enhance it as the policy requires.

3. Northants Police - recommends that the applicant should confirm that the access meets the requirements of the Northamptonshire Fire and Rescue Service and of Building Regulation B5 - Access and Facilities for the Fire Service. All doors and windows to meet in domestic dwelling should meet the requirements of Approved Document Q of Building Regulations. Northamptonshire Police recommend the use of 3rd party accredited products.

Confirm that plan 19 1014 (68) 01 meets the requirements of B5 (15/12/20).

4. Planning Policy - recommends that similarly to the previously refused scheme, this proposal would need to be judged in accordance with policy 13(2) of the JCS and Paragraph 79(e) of the NPPF in order to be acceptable in principle as a development in the open countryside.

The design of the scheme must therefore be both exceptional and innovative in order to comply with these policies. In order to assess whether the scheme meets these criteria an independent accredited design review should be undertaken.

It is noted that there was a similar application refused and dismissed on appeal at the site in 2018. It would need to be considered as to whether this new application has satisfied the concerns of the previous refusal.

The impacts of the scheme on landscape character and biodiversity would have to be fully considered in accordance with policies 3 and 4, particularly its impacts on the neighbouring SSSI. A net biodiversity gain should be sought from the development.

Planning Committee 91 of 131 3 February 2021

The scheme would need to be assessed against the criteria in policy 8 of the JCS.

The house would have to ensure that it met the requirements of policy 30(b) and (c) of the JCS in terms of meeting space standards and accessibility standards and that it exceeds policy 9 of the JCS in terms of high standards of resource and energy efficiency and reduction in carbon emissions including water use standards and electric or ultra-low vehicle charging.

5. Natural England - no objection, subject to condition. The application, as submitted, should not adversely affect the interest features of Dungee Corner Meadow Site of Special Scientific Importance (SSSI). Condition recommended regarding information about the proximity to the SSSI. No further comments (21/12/20).

6. Wildlife Trust - recommend that the proposal includes a range of measures which would enhance the application site for wildlife, it just needs careful attention to ensure no unintentional damage or degradation to Dungee Corner Meadow SSSI occurs as a result. Condition recommended regarding prevention of damage to the SSSI through the storage of materials on the site or vehicle turning etc. The meadow areas within the site should be created using seed or green hay collected from the adjacent SSSI.

7. BCW Environmental Protection - no objection, subject to condition on unexpected contamination. No further comments (5/1/21).

8. BCW Environmental Health - no objection, subject to condition. The isolated location is unlikely to be adversely impacted by environmental noise. Electric vehicle charging facilities have been incorporated into the design and the house is intended to meet very high energy efficiency standards. Adverse impacts on air quality are expected to be very low. There are no nearby properties that are likely to be significantly adversely affected by noise or dust from construction activities, however, it would be prudent to consider noise and dust impacts in a construction environmental management plan. No further comments (23/12/20).

9. Northamptonshire Archaeology - recommend a condition is required. The application site is located on the north side of Harrold Road, east of the village of Bozeat. Immediately to the east of the site is the projected line of the Roman road from Water Newton, which continues to the south of the site through Dungee Wood and has been projected as far as Kempston in Bedford. In the field to the north of the site the county Historic Environment Record indicates the presence of a number of cropmarks interpreted as Iron Age and Romano-British settlement, based on finds from fieldwalking and a poorly documented minor excavation. The cropmarks include enclosures and possible building platforms. The Dungee Barn Second World War searchlight battery was also located in this field and some of the cropmarks are therefore likely to relate to this. There is the potential for archaeological remains to survive on the site, albeit truncated. The proposed application will have a detrimental impact upon any archaeological deposits present. This does not however represent an over-riding constraint on the development provided that adequate provision is made for the investigation and recording of any remains that are affected. A condition for an archaeological programme of works as per NPPF paragraph 199 is required.

Planning Committee 92 of 131 3 February 2021

No further comments (6/1/21).

10. Bedford Borough Council - no comments received.

11. BCW Landscape Officer - the design would remove a row of trees (G3 in the arboricultural report). The report dismisses them as aging, of poor quality and of limited safe life expectancy, they are unlikely to fulfil the criteria for affording them statutory protection, but they are part of the character of the site. There is a requirement for net biodiversity gain and again there are proposed wildflower lawns, including meadow turf for green roofs, but the Wildlife Trust have made the comment that because the site is next to the SSSI provenance would be a concern. The recommendation to harvest seed from the SSSI would avoid potential adverse effects on the valuable meadow. A landscape assessment has been submitted with viewpoints and a predictably positive take on the contribution the building would make to the landscape, but whether or not the design is sufficiently exceptional in planning terms is the fundamental question. Views into the SSSI from the road will be more limited, and as ever there is a tension between the argument that it is good for the building to be screened but on the other hand if it is truly exceptional should it not be visible.

Further comments on revised Appendix L5 of the Landscape Assessment: The additional information is helpful and demonstrates that the visual impact on the wider landscape would be fairly minimal. Viewpoint 4 is the most telling. It is reminiscent of a larger than originally anticipated house on the approach to one of the other villages in our area which always strikes me as somewhat incongruous, but it is on the approach to the village and this is not. The photomontage also reinforces my view that the small trees on the boundary with the SSSI have been judged rather too harshly with a recommendation to remove them, but they are shown as if they would be retained.

12. Neighbours - no comments received.

ASSESSMENT AND REASONED JUSTIFICATION Principle of development

Since the previous appeal decision, the Plan for the Borough of Wellingborough has been adopted (February 2019). The previous application identified that emerging policy SS1 of that plan was relevant.

PBW policy SS1 states that village boundaries are defined on the Policies Map. The Map defines the boundary of Bozeat, the nearest village, and clearly shows that the site lies within the open countryside.

The site is located within a rural area. JCS policy 11 (2) (a) states that development in rural areas will be limited to that required to support a prosperous rural economy or to meet a locally arising need, which cannot be met more sustainably at a nearby larger settlement. It also states that other forms of development will be resisted in the open countryside unless there are special circumstances as set out in policy 13 of the JCS or national policy.

Planning Committee 93 of 131 3 February 2021

JCS policy 13 (2) (a) confirms that new residential development in the open countryside, will not normally be permitted unless it would be either (a) be of exceptional quality or innovative design or (b) a house for an essential rural worker. The policy refers to specific paragraphs of the plan, which state that within North Northamptonshire, proposals will 'provide innovative standards of sustainable design, in excess of those set out in policy 9 and national regulations, and make an outstanding contribution to the character of the landscape, promoting and reinforcing local distinctiveness'. As promoted by the plan, the applicant has sought early advice on the design of the scheme through an accredited design review by OPUN, to provide an independent assessment of the proposal.

Therefore, the proposal for a new dwelling on the site is not acceptable in principle, unless the proposal meets the exception stated in policy 13 (2) (a) of the JCS and is considered to be an 'individual dwelling of exceptional quality or innovative design' including exceeding the requirements of policy 9 'Sustainable Buildings' and national regulations. Policy 13 (2) (a) of the JCS is broadly in accordance with national policy in the NPPF.

The NPPF is a material consideration in the determination of the application. NPPF paragraph 79 (e) reads as follows:

"Planning policies and decisions should avoid the development of isolated homes in the countryside unless one or more of the following circumstances apply: e) the design is of exceptional quality, in that it:

- is truly outstanding or innovative, reflecting the highest standards in architecture, and would help to raise standards of design more generally in rural areas; and - would significantly enhance its immediate setting, and be sensitive to the defining characteristics of the local area."

The application has been submitted to specifically comply with paragraph 79 (e) of the NPPF. Under paragraph 79 (e) of the NPPF the headline requirement is for the proposal's design to be of "exceptional quality", and the requirement of the first bullet point is for a truly outstanding or innovative design and needs to meet the highest standards of architecture. The requirement of the second bullet point for a proposal to significantly enhance its immediate setting would not in any way reduce the need for outstanding design. The requirement for "exceptional quality" represents a high bar, not easily met. This requirement needs to be borne in mind when assessing this application.

The previous appeal decision (31/12/18) is a material consideration to this proposal. The proposal has changed significantly since that appeal was dismissed, but the Inspectors views are relevant to the consideration of the proposal as the application again proposes a Paragraph 79 (e) dwelling on the same site.

Whether the proposal meets NPPF Paragraph 79 (e) Summary of the Proposal The application is supported by a Design and Access/Sustainability/Planning Statement (herein to as the 'Statement') and a Design Response to the Design Review by OPUN. The design objective of the development is to provide a family home; an outstanding,

Planning Committee 94 of 131 3 February 2021

environmentally sensitive scheme that makes the most of the unique location overlooking Dungee Meadow and reflects its sensitive ecology in the landscape approach. The proposed design has evolved from the wish to have views over the meadow, privacy and security from Harrold Road and include a home office.

The submitted Statement considers the proposed scheme is landscape based, focusing upon the key features of the hedgerow to Harrold Road and the low-key boundary to the SSSI meadow. The pear tree to the west of the site is proposed to be retained for its sculptural quality.

The previous scheme dismissed at appeal proposed a curved form of dwelling. The planning inspector considered that externally, the design of the house of the appeal scheme itself would be assured but for the most part unremarkable, in a relatively conventional contemporary idiom of plain rendered walls, large metal-framed windows and standing-seam metal roofs finishing in a tapered edge.

This application proposes an irregular quadrilateral form, with straight edges to follow the shape of the site. The proposed dwelling is a courtyard shape to reflect the form of Dungee Barn (visible from the site and located to the south-west and on the opposite side of Harrold Road) and the roman villa history in the wider area. The substantial boundary to the courtyard would conceal the house from Harrold Road, and reveal the house when the timber sliding gate is opened. The courtyard gate would be vertical timber.

Internally, the dwelling is split into 3 blocks, with an internal circulation route. The living and working spaces are to the west wing, the kitchen, dining area and master suite and two storey viewing gallery are in the north wing facing the meadow and the bedrooms and garage in the east wing. The central two storey element contains the main dwelling entrance and directly faces the entrance gate. From the entrance gate views would be possible to the meadow, through the doors and an equal sized glazed window on the north elevation. The east and west wing are single storey and have mono-pitched meadow turf roofs sloping into the courtyard. The single storey section of the north wing has a mono-pitch pantile roof sloping towards the meadow and a flat meadow turf roof to the corridor area facing the courtyard. The two-storey section of the north wing has a pantile roof including vertical hung tiles, and pantile profile solar tiles. The agent has confirmed in an email dated 14/12/20 that the solar tiles are not currently available in the United Kingdom. Therefore, the alternative would be to use clay pantiles on the two-storey section and to add solar panels to the single storey wings of the dwelling, on the green roofs.

The statement notes that the local building materials are limestone, soft red brick and grey slate and red pantile roofing. The dwelling is to be constructed of stone, with red brick quoin detail around the exterior windows. Windows and doors are to be full height timber windows with timber lintels. All rooms have windows facing onto either the meadow or the garden. The upper floor of the north elevation contains the lounge and has a large full height door/window behind a glass balustrade (Juliet balcony). On the north elevation, the upper floor window overhangs the ground floor and the overhang would be wrapped in zinc cladding. On the courtyard elevations, the north wing has 6 horizontal clerestory windows set within a brick elevation. The east and west wings each have 4 glazed panels each containing a full height triple window set within a brick elevation. The windows facing the courtyard have pivoting timber screens which lift and

Planning Committee 95 of 131 3 February 2021

fold horizontally, forming brise soleil. The east wing includes 2 timber garage doors. There are two small sections of vertical oak cladding above the two side doors leading from the hall corridor to the garden.

All exterior windows are recessed and have sliding timber shutters. The shutters can be concealed behind the stone facing elevations. The shutters will operate on a PIR (passive infrared sensor) triggered by a reduction in ambient light, but can also be opened manually. The statement asserts that with the shutters open the house will be revealed, with the shutters closed, the dwelling materials of stone, brick and timber will be reminiscent of agricultural buildings, without being a faux barn conversion. The dwelling is called 'Reveal House' to reflect the concept of the dwelling being revealed upon entering the courtyard and revealed from behind the external and internal shutters. The submitted plans show the elevations with the shutters open. Further plans showing the shutters closed were requested and have been submitted. All shutters will be vertical timber.

The dwelling is sited to provide framed views of the pear tree to the west and a proposed horse chestnut tree to the east. These two trees will be viewed from the glazed doors on the east and west elevations, at either end of the entrance hall corridor.

Access to the dwelling and garden is suitable for wheelchairs and pushchairs via the level limestone aggregate and limestone paving. Within the house, the ground floor is fully accessible in accordance with Part M4(2) of the Building Regulations.

A private garden is proposed to the east of the house, adjacent to the garden of Dungee House. This will comprise a lawn, utility space and vegetable garden. The boundaries will be defined by a new hedgerow. To the west and north of the dwelling, adjacent to the meadow, the site will be planted with meadow grasses and include a patio on the western side. To the south of the dwelling, will be the vehicular access point, driveway and parking area and access to the double garage. The driveway will consist of a bonded limestone aggregate. The site entrance will be secured by a sliding 1.8 metres high wooden gate to the driveway. Plan (06)33 shows this gate will be 5.0 metres in width and consist of natural untreated oak vertical board.

The Statement notes that the site is to be landscaped to provide different habitats. The north and western boundaries will be minimal post and wire fencing, and areas to the site to the north and west of the dwelling, will be planted as summer meadow (with the exception of a patio area adjacent the kitchen). The southern boundary to the road will be planted with native trees and shrubs and the hedge renovated. The area to the east of the dwelling (the largest area of the site) will be split into a private lawned garden, vegetable garden and large utility space. Planting will include fruit trees, to reflect the previous use of the site as an orchard. Hedgerows will be planted to the northern and eastern boundaries and to separate the lawn and utility area. Within the courtyard of the house a sheltered garden is proposed.

To be considered as a paragraph 79 (e) dwelling, the development would need to be for an 'isolated home in the countryside'. This is a matter of fact and planning judgement. This point was considered in the previous appeal and it was considered that despite the proximity to Dungee House, the site is 'isolated'.

Planning Committee 96 of 131 3 February 2021

The following paragraphs discuss whether the proposal is considered to meet each of the parts of paragraph 79 (e) in turn.

The design is of exceptional quality in that it truly outstanding or innovative The appeal decision for the previous proposal on the site notes that 'It was agreed at the hearing by both parties that 'exceptional quality' represented a high bar, not easily met' (paragraph 14).

JCS at policy 8 (d) (i) and (ii) describes the principles that proposed development must take into account with regards to its effect on the character and appearance of an area.

The government at paragraph 127 (a) - (d) of the revised NPPF attach great importance to the design of built development. It goes on to advise that planning decisions should ensure that development will function well and add quality of the overall area; not just for the short term but over the life time of a development; are visually attractive as a result of good architecture, layout and appropriate and effective landscaping; are sympathetic to local character and history, including the built environment and landscape setting, while not discouraging appropriate innovation and change; establish or maintain a strong sense of place, using the arrangements of streets, space, building types and materials to create attractive, welcoming and distinctive places to live, work and visit.

The National Design Guide, illustrates how well-designed places that are beautiful, enduring and successful can be achieved in practice. It forms part of the Government's collection of planning practice guidance and should be read alongside the separate planning practice guidance on design process and tools.

Paragraph 79 (e) requires that the design is truly outstanding or innovative, it does not require a design to be both, but the design needs to be of 'exceptional quality'.

The Statement refers to the design as reflecting Dungee Barn and the local roman past. The Statement refers to the proximity of the roman road that runs north towards the fort at Irchester, and the evidence of a roman villa found at Yelnow Villa 5 kilometres to the east. But there is no known roman history on the site itself. The layout does not reflect the adjacent Dungee House, which is positioned close to and facing the road. The latest OPUN letter also noted that the existing buildings and the role they play in the evolution of the site and sense of place, had not been considered in the evolution of the design.

The reveal concept of the proposal is not considered to be fully reflected in all aspects of the scheme. The main entrance to the dwelling is opposite to the courtyard gate and highlighted by its position in the 2-storey section. But the door itself is a very standard glazed double door, and not an exceptional entrance feature revealing the dwelling and the meadow beyond. The meadow view would also be interrupted internally by the dining table. The latest OPUN letter also noted that once within the courtyard, the whole house is fully legible.

The design does utilise local materials in stone, brick, timber windows and slate/pan tiles. The design introduces framed untreated natural oak shutters as a major design feature (and key to the concept of 'reveal') and zinc cladding, and two small areas of exterior oak cladding. The use of local stone as the main building material is welcomed

Planning Committee 97 of 131 3 February 2021

and appropriate to the site. Red brick is to be used for bold window surrounds and as the facing material within the courtyard. It is not clear why zinc is used for the main feature window facing the meadow. Figure 1.1 in the Statement shows grey zinc, but it is noted that zinc is available in various subtle shades of red, green, blue and brown.

A standard double garage upon the entrance to the site does not fit with the concept of 'reveal'. Upon entering the site, visitors would immediately see the typical residential style garage and so the 'reveal' concept is somewhat diluted, as it is clear the site contains a dwelling. The siting of the garage was also noted in the latest OPUN letter, which suggested it was either integrated so its forms part of the courtyard or treated as an object/feature in the landscape.

Further details of the driveway gate were requested and plan number (06)33 shows a 5.0 metre wide timber gate which would measure 1.8 metres in height in vertical untreated oak. Although the oak would be untreated, the gate would still be a large prominent feature in the hedgerow boundary. The proposed design is more akin to an urban location.

In addition, the large outdoor 'utility space' feels like a left-over piece of land with no purpose, relationship to the house or the 'reveal' concept. This space could be used to create a partially sunken garage for example, which would align with the 'reveal' concept and could also include a green roof, like the dwelling. This would also be more appropriate to the layout, in that neither a roman villa nor a barn would have a residential garage. Also, this would reflect the layout of the adjacent Dungee Corner, which is a detached house, with detached outbuildings.

In summary, the concept of 'reveal' is not carried through and fully reflected on the site as a whole, particularly the proposed attached garage, and the urban style vehicular access gate. There is no design justification for the non-vernacular materials proposed. Therefore, the design of the scheme is not considered to be of exceptional quality or truly outstanding.

Turning to the question of whether the proposal is innovative, the main innovative material proposed is the Tesla Tuscan Solar Roof Tile. This is a new product, although the black textured tile is on general distribution. Further details of this product were requested, and the agent has confirmed in an email dated 4/12/20 that technical details are not available and the tile is not currently available in the United Kingdom. This is an inappropriate offer of innovation in that there is no guarantee the product can ever be provided for this specific development. The agent states 'we are aware that this part of the roof is the most visible and defining element of this house'. This is clear from plan number (06)33 which shows the vehicular gate and the prominent two-storey section visible from the road. As an alternative to the solar tile, red pantile would be used on the two-storey section and solar panels added to the single storey roof slopes, on the green roof. Therefore, the use of this innovative product is not possible. In addition, no details have been provided of what the solar panels on the green roofs would look like (size, number, colour, prominence etc) and how their presence would impact on the green roof.

The appeal decision for the previous proposal noted that the 'simple palette of materials would be affected by the solar array that would cover virtually all of one main roof slope, but it is not shown on the submitted elevations' (paragraph 15). This is again the case

Planning Committee 98 of 131 3 February 2021

with this proposal, in that the impact of the solar panels cannot assessed as it is not shown on the elevations.

The second innovation proposed are the terracotta pantiles be used to form a vertical rainscreen. Hanging tiles to vertical elevations are used on dwellings, and various examples can be found online. Therefore, this is not considered innovative. In addition, the Statement refers to the use of zinc flashings on the northern elevation as an 'innovative twist'. The agent has confirmed these will not be visible.

The dwelling would use electrochromatic glass to the large first-floor feature window facing the meadow to remove light spill. Further details of the glazing to the first floor was requested and has been received. The SageGlass proposed will tint automatically or on demand to control reduction in light spill could be controlled to be 60% to 1% visible light transmission. In its darkest state it is almost opaque yet maintains a view out. The agent states that this material has never been used in a domestic situation before. The technology is available. However, the SageGlass information submitted shows that the maximum pane size is 1.83 metres by 3.0 metres. The large central pane proposed is 2.2 metres by 2.7 metres approximately, therefore the SageGlass product would not be available for this design.

The use of automatic shutters to the exterior of the dwelling is also proposed to remove light spill. However, the use of both of these technologies to reduce light spill, would be at the discretion of the future occupier. The reduction in light spill is therefore not guaranteed. A further innovation would be to automate these features of the dwelling to ensure minimal light spill.

Policy 9 of the JCS is clear that development should incorporate measures to ensure high standards of resource and energy efficiency and reduction in carbon emissions. All residential development should incorporate measures to limit use to no more than 105 litres/person/day and external water use of no more than 5 litres/person/day or alternative national standard applying to areas of water stress.

The latest OPUN design review of the scheme commented that sustainability approaches should be clearly set out. The approach to solar shading and light spill was considered interesting. The OPUN design review considered that water collection and recycling was a positive addition.

The current application proposes a net zero carbon dwelling, as suggested at pre- application stage. The scheme proposes:

- exemplar energy use (15-35 kWH/m2 per year) - thermal efficiency in construction, materials and appliances - materials from sustainable/managed and local sources - mechanical ventilation and heat recovery - Shutters used for shading - Shutters on the external elevations to be closed by an ambient light PIR system to conserve energy and reduce light spill - renewable energy from ground source heat pump - solar photovoltaic roof tiles to part of the southern roof slope (as mentioned, the agent has confirmed this product is not available) - foul drainage to a bio-digester

Planning Committee 99 of 131 3 February 2021

- Rainwater harvesting from roof and courtyard to be used for flushing toilets and irrigating the garden - Permeable surfacing of the driveway - Low water demand to meet JCS policy 9 - Storage batteries in the garage - Electric vehicle charging points in the garage - The guest bedroom wing can be closed down when not in use, to save energy.

It is considered that the above measures will provide for a high level of sustainability and all measures could be secured by condition. However, photovoltaic roof tiles are not available and no details are provided. The alternative suggested use of solar panels on the green roofs, with hanging tile and zinc flashing, is not considered ground- breaking. The range of now commercially available technologies listed above, cannot be regarded as truly innovative design features in their own right.

The proposed landscaping of the site is considered later in this report.

Overall, the proposal fails to demonstrate the proposed design is particularly innovative, and the main innovative measure is not available and the measures to reduce light spill would be at the discretion of the future occupiers and would clearly have a material effect on the proposed design of this roof slope. The design would need to be altered to accommodate the alternative technology (solar panels on the green roofs) and the impact of this has not been considered by the applicant.

In conclusion, as highlighted above, JCS policy 13 (a) requires a paragraph 79 (e) dwelling to meet and exceed requirements of JCS policy 9. Although the requirements of policy 9 are exceeded, the proposal is not considered to be of exceptional quality or innovative design as required by policy 13 (2) (a) of the JCS and paragraph 79 (e) of the NPPF.

And would help raise standards of design more generally in rural areas.

All new development is expected to be appropriate for its location. The design has responded to previous concerns about the materials; and the stone and brick and wooden windows now reflect local materials. But there is no explanation in the application as to the choice of zinc in the most prominent two-storey section of the dwelling. The impact of the use of solar panels as an alternative to the solar pantiles in the design, has not been considered fully. The design is clearly heavily influenced by the form of Dungee Barn to the south-west, but the dwelling design has no relationship with the nearest dwelling Dungee Corner, which has not influenced the design. The landscaping to the meadow boundaries helps to blend the site with the meadow.

Further details of the driveway gate were requested, and plan number (06)33 shows a 5.0 metre wide gate for the proposed 3.6 metre wide driveway. The gate size and design does not reflect the rural location and is an inappropriate urban feature and does not raise standards in the rural area.

In addition, light spill in a rural location is a concern. The northern and western elevations will have windows facing the meadow and will be visible to users of the nearby roads. The shutters proposed will reduce light spill, but their use is at the

Planning Committee 100 of 131 3 February 2021

discretion of the occupier. As highlighted earlier, the SageGlass proposed is not available in the size required.

The site is located within a rural area and thus would require the use of the private car. Electric charging points are proposed, but only in the residential garage. It is noted that the large office would allow working from home, and the Statement includes reference to work-related visitors (and provides a separate courtyard door access for these). However, no vehicle charging is provided for these visitors, who would need to arrive by car.

The proposed sustainability features of the dwelling are very high but features such as next generation access broadband infrastructure would enable home-working and reduce reliance upon work-related car visits. There is no commitment to this within the proposal.

It is noted that the Inspector in the previous appeal considered that the previous proposal would raise standards. The impact of the use of solar panels as an alternative to the solar pantiles has not been considered fully; the impact on the design is not clear. The use of the urban style vehicular entrance gate is not appropriate to the rural setting. The use of SageGlass to the large first floor window does not appear possible, due to the size of the window. Overall, despite the use of some local materials, the scheme will not raise design standards.

And would significantly enhance its immediate setting.

The NPPF also requires designs to 'significantly' enhance their immediate setting. In this case the immediate setting consists of the application site, which is currently garden land containing a number of trees around the boundaries to the application site, the existing dwelling house and associated garden to the east and a site of SSSI to the north and west. The SSSI contains a whole field of traditionally managed neutral hay meadow with purple orchids which flower in May/June each year. In order to retain its conservation interest, the SSSI requires active management each year to remove each year's growth of vegetation. To achieve this objective the fields are closed to stock in the autumn and the resultant growth of hay is usually cut early July each year following the flowering each year of the purple orchids.

The site is currently overgrown garden land that would benefit from some maintenance. It contains a hedgerow and trees that are typical of the area and fruit trees that reflect its use at one time as an orchard. The site is not considered to have a negative impact upon its immediate setting and is a settled part of the landscape.

Effect on landscape visual amenity Policy 3 (a), (b) and (e) of the JCS states that development should be located and designed in a way that is sensitive to its landscape setting retaining and where possible enhancing the distinctive qualities of the landscape character area which it would affect.

JCS policy 8 (d) (i) and (ii) states development should respond to the site's immediate and wider context and local character to create buildings which draw on the best of that local character, respond to local topography and the overall form, character and landscape setting, without stifling innovation.

Planning Committee 101 of 131 3 February 2021

The appeal decision for the previous proposal noted that 'there is no reason why an outstanding design could not successfully employ such devices [angular overhanging roofs and standing seam metal] while also achieving the objective of significant enhancement of the immediate setting. JCS policy 8 expressly envisages the scope for innovation' (paragraph 20).

The application is supported by a Landscape Impact Assessment (LIA) (June 2020 and January 2021). This was suggested by the first Design Review. The Assessment identifies the site as within the National Landscape Character Area 91 'Yardeley Wittlewood Ridge' and the local 'Bozeat Claylands' character area. These areas are characterised by arable land, extremely low woodland cover and mature oak and ash trees within hedgerows. Settlement is limited in the character area, with isolated dwellings along minor roads and at the end of tracks positioned at right angles to the road.

The site is visible from the two roads Harrold Road and Dungee Road, and from the Three Shires Way public footpath to the south-east. Users of the roads/footpath would have a high sensitivity to landscape change. The surrounding area is not designated nationally or locally for its landscape value.

The Assessment notes that the house will be exposed to the landscape on the north and west. The assessment considers the 'strong unapologetic form of the house is reminiscent of that of Dungee Barn, and its effect on the landscape when viewed from the north and west will be similar. It will be glimpsed in association with Dungee Barn from the Three Shires Way as an outstanding interpretation of rural architecture'. The Assessment considered the visual effect from 12 viewpoints. From Harrold Road, the effect is stated as between no change/minor to moderate and positive due to the dwellings' 'low lying form and rural character'. The same conclusions are made regarding views from Dungee Road. From the Three Shires Way, the effect on views are only considered to be minor and positive.

The case officer requested superimposed images of the dwelling onto the photographs taken at the viewpoints. These were received on 11/1/21 as a revised Appendix L5 to the LIA. In addition, a proposed view of the development from Harrold Road was also requested. This view is considered key to the 'reveal' concept of the proposal. Plan number (06)33 has been submitted and shows that the proposed 5.0 metre wide gate and the two storey section of the dwelling will be visible from the road. The northern elevation facing Harrold Road will also be visible before the hedgerow and planting to the roadside are mature. The garage, stone wall and clerestory windows in the brick elevation will all be visible in this time.

The meadow planting up to the house is welcomed and would enhance that western approach to the site and blend the site boundary with the SSSI. From the site visit it is considered that the dwelling will be visible from Harrold Road (viewpoints 3 and 4) due to the appropriate minimal boundary proposed to the meadow. This is shown in the revised Appendix L5 to the LIA. The two-storey zinc element will be visible due to its height and position in the plot. The proposed 1.8 metre high timber gate to the driveway will also be highly visible due to its location on the site boundary and its design and size. From Dungee Road (viewpoint 6) the dwelling will be visible for the same reason. Views of the dwelling from the Three Shires Way will be minimised by the proposed hedgerow and the 7 metre deep planting along Harrold Road. The

Planning Committee 102 of 131 3 February 2021

planting would provide screening in winter from the bulk of twigs (Appendix 5 of the Planning Statement provides a planting schedule).

Overall, it is considered that the position of the dwelling within the plot does not minimise its landscape impact. The dwelling could be positioned further east in the plot to minimise the views of the two-storey zinc/glass element from Harrold Road and Dungee Road (viewpoints 3, 4, 8, 9 and 10). It is not considered that this section is low lying or rural in character as concluded in the LIA. The large vehicular entrance gate is out of keeping with the rural character of the area, where a simple field gate would be the typical entrance.

The prominent position of the vehicular access gate, and the prominent two-storey section does not fit with the concept of 'reveal'. Moving the gate further within the plot and moving the dwelling further east would further screen both elements from view; providing 'glimpses' of the development which would be more consistent with the 'reveal' concept.

The council's landscape officer notes that the LIA suggests the development will make a positive contribution to the landscape. The additional information in revised Appendix L5 demonstrates that the visual impact on the wider landscape would be fairly minimal. The view of the dwelling from the access point will be of the two-storey section. The remainder of the dwelling may be largely hidden from Harrold Road once the landscaping matures. The Landscape Officer notes that there is a tension between the argument that it is good for the building to be screened but on the other hand if it is truly exceptional should it not be visible.

In conclusion, it is considered that the submitted plans and landscape appraisal fail to demonstrate that the development will significantly enhance its immediate setting as required by NPPF paragraph 79 (e). The development would introduce a large building into the open setting, with a prominent incongruous feature two-storey section and a large urban style gate within a rural hedgerow. The development would also be contrary to policies 3 (a) and 8 (d) (ii) and (ii) of the JCS

And be sensitive to the defining characteristics of the local area

JCS policy 8 (d) (i) and (ii) seek new development to respond to the local topography and overall form, character and landscape setting of a sites immediate and wider and local context. The local area in the vicinity of the site consists of isolated residential dwellings known as Dungee Corner and Dungee Barns which are part two storey and part single storey and both buildings are surrounded by dense planting consisting of a combination of trees and hedgerows. The defining characteristics of the local area consists of isolated dwellings surrounded by open fields containing various crops and an SSSI containing a hay meadow with rare purple orchids lies to the north and west of Dungee Corner which are surrounded by hedgerows of varying heights.

The latest OPUN review of the scheme noted that the building seems to work as a low key and 'polite' intervention in the countryside, reflecting the barns in close proximity, but suggested that the design be more creative in the way local materials are used to elevate the building to 'exceptional quality'.

Planning Committee 103 of 131 3 February 2021

The proposed meadow landscaping blends the site with the adjacent meadow and the green roof reflects the wider arable landscape. However, the largest section of garden reflects a standard residential garden, with a large utility space. The enclosed courtyard garden is an interesting feature and not typical of local rural dwellings, but can occur in barn conversions. The Statement stresses the scheme is not a faux barn conversion. The hedgerow is to be improved and further hedgerows planted. The roadside trees are to remain, and the road boundary enhanced with native shrub planting. The latest OPUN review letter noted that the movement strategy was unclear. The site layout shows that upon arrival, a person can move via a path beside the garage to the patio within the meadow area. This free movement to the outside areas does not appear to follow to the 'reveal' concept.

The dwelling uses local materials of stone, brick and pantile. The predominant building material reflects the local stone, but the choice of zinc roof in the two-storey focal point of the dwelling is not explained and does not reflect the vernacular. The external elevations use large brick surrounds on every opening. This is clearly taken from the Dungee Barn, but given the number and size of openings on the dwelling the brick features appears to be excessive. The use of brick surrounds and timber headers is considered awkward.

The green roof, the retention of the trees and the native hedgerow and shrub planting are all welcomed. The green roof would however be covered by the solar panels to some extent (the extent is not known as no details have been submitted).

The side (western) elevation visible from Harold Road would be angular and a mix of materials and features not common to the area, including the timber shutters. The southern elevation facing the road would highlight the urban style of the gate and the angular two-storey section. The design, scale, form and materials do not blend with the local area.

The two-storey section has been designed to maximise the view of the meadow, and the angular form reflects the intention to use solar tiles. However, the solar tiles are not available and so the form and design are less convincing.

Overall, the dwelling is located within a sensitive location, adjacent to an SSSI, where clear rural views are possible over the SSSI. These views are currently not interrupted by buildings. The character of the area consists of isolated dwellings and farms, in large plots. The scale of the proposed dwelling on the plot is large. The dwelling uses local materials, but the angular design and large number of shuttered windows defined by brick surrounds is not sensitive to the defining characteristics of the local area.

Conclusion regarding NPPF paragraph 79 (e)

The proposed development is not considered to meet the exceptional quality required by paragraph 79 (e) of the NPPF and policy 13 (2) (a) of the JCS. The design is not truly outstanding or innovative, reflecting the highest standards of architecture and would not help to raise standards of design in the rural area. The design concept of 'reveal' is not carried through into the whole development. The solar tiles are unavailable, and this key innovation detail cannot be left to be secured by condition. The alternative design of solar panels on the green roofs has not been fully considered by the applicant. The design utilises local materials but the urban style vehicular

Planning Committee 104 of 131 3 February 2021

entrance gate is not appropriate to the rural setting. The use of SageGlass to the large first floor window does not appear possible, due to the size of the window. The development does not raise standards in rural areas. The submitted plans and landscape appraisal fail to demonstrate that the development will significantly enhance its immediate setting. The development would introduce a large building into the open setting, with a large urban style gate within a rural hedgerow. The angular design and large number of shuttered windows defined by brick surrounds are not sensitive to the defining characteristics of the local area. The previous dismissed appeal is a material planning consideration. The previous reasons for dismissing the appeal have not been overcome through this application.

In addition to paragraph 79 (e) of the NPPF the application would need to meet all relevant Development Plan policy. The relevant policy considerations are set out below.

Effect on biodiversity Paragraph 40 of the Natural Environment and Rural Communities Act, under the heading of 'duty to conserve biodiversity' states "every public authority must, in exercising its functions, have regard, so far as is consistent with the proper exercise of those functions, to the purpose of conserving biodiversity."

The JCS at policy 4 - biodiversity and geodiversity, sets out policy requirements for the protection and where possible, a net gain in biodiversity.

The revised NPPF at chapter 15 'conserving and enhancing the natural environment' sets out government views on minimising the impacts on biodiversity, providing net gains where possible and contributing to halt the overall decline in biodiversity.

The application is supported by a Preliminary Ecological Appraisal, eDNA Survey for Great Crested Newts, a Tree Survey and Impact/Method Statement and Landscape Plan. The site is located within 5 kilometres of five statutory sites, including the adjacent SSSI, but the site is of low to moderate ecological value. Within the site are fruit trees, tree stumps, hedgerow and various trees. Habitats are of low to moderate value. The Ecological Appraisal recommends the retention of the southern boundary hedgerow and the mature and fruit trees. There is no evidence of Great Crested Newts. The Tree Survey recommends the removal of several fruit trees.

The proposals offer opportunity for biodiversity enhancements. The Ecological Appraisal recommends that to secure a net gain in biodiversity, a native hedgerow should be planted on the site boundary, subject to Natural England consultation (it is not clear which boundary). The Tree Survey recommends the removal of the group of fruit trees, and 2 other trees. All remaining trees are to be retained and further trees planted to the southern boundary. The Landscape Plan also shows an additional hedgerow, native shrubs and 4 new fruit trees and a horse chestnut within the garden. Within the courtyard dwarf fruit trees and olive trees are proposed. A Planting Schedule is provided in Appendix 5 of the Planning Statement.

The Landscape Officer considers that the existing fruit trees are unlikely to fulfil the criteria for statutory protection, but they are part of the character of the site. The wildflower lawns and meadow turf for green roofs would contribute to net biodiversity gain.

Planning Committee 105 of 131 3 February 2021

Natural England consider that the meadow areas within the site should be created using seed or green hay collected from the adjacent SSSI, to prevent potential adverse effects on the valuable meadow. The Wildlife Trust concur with this view. A condition is also recommended regarding prevention of damage to the SSSI through the storage of materials on the site or vehicle turning.

Further conditions are recommended to secure precautions during site clearance, tree survey for bats/birds before any tree removal, tree protection, lighting details to minimise light spill on the hedgerow and the recommendations within section 8 of the Ecological Appraisal. A condition is also required to secure a repeat eDNA survey after 2 years and to secure full landscaping details.

The utility area is a large part of the site and is proposed to be for composting, plant propagation, leaf mould and possibly keeping hens. This is a large part of the garden that is sectioned off from the rest of the garden and is an under-used area of the site.

The vehicular access would create a gap in the existing hedgerow of at least 3.6 metres. The loss of some hedgerow is acceptable, but it should be the minimum necessary for the access.

Overall, subject to the necessary conditions to secure net biodiversity gain and no detrimental impact on the SSSI, the proposal meets JCS policy 4.

Effect on archaeology JCS policy 2 (d) requires that where proposals would result in the unavoidable and justifiable loss of archaeological remains, provision should be made for recording and the production of a suitable archive and report.

With regards the revised NPPF, section 16 sets out government advice on conserving and enhancing the historic environment and in particular paragraph 189 advises that, where appropriate, when determining an application which could affect a heritage asset with archaeological interest the council should, where appropriate, require developers to submit a field evaluation.

The County Archaeologist notes that the site is close to the projected line of the roman road from Water Newton through Dungee Wood. Also, there is evidence of crop marks in the field to the north, possibly an Iron Age and Romano-British settlement. There is the potential for archaeological remains to survive on the site, albeit truncated. The proposed application will have a detrimental impact upon any archaeological deposits present. This does not however represent an over-riding constraint on the development provided that adequate provision is made for the investigation and recording of any remains that are affected. A condition for an archaeological programme of works as per NPPF paragraph 199 is required.

Subject to the condition, the proposal would meet policy 2 and advice contained within paragraph 199 the NPPF.

Effect on flood risk and drainage The JCS at policy 5 sets out a raft of sub-policies aimed at preventing or reducing flood risk.

Planning Committee 106 of 131 3 February 2021

The revised NPPF at chapter 14 sets out government policy on how the planning system should take into account the risks caused by flooding. The planning practice guidance under the chapter titled 'flood risk and climate change' gives detailed advice on how planning can take account of the risks associated with flooding in the application process.

The application site is located in an area that has a very low chance of flooding from surface water and from rivers. This means that each year, this area has a change of flooding of less than 1 in 1000 (0.1%).

No neighbour objections have been received in relation to the effects of flood risk and drainage.

The proposed development would comply with policy 5 of the JCS.

Effect on foul sewage JCS Policy 10 (b) requires new development to minimise increases in the demand for additional/expanded water infrastructure. Whilst policy 10 (c) states that planning permission will only be granted if it can be demonstrated that there will be sufficient infrastructure capacity provided within an agreed timescale to support and meet all the requirements which arise from the proposed development. Policy 10 (d) states that the council and developers should work with infrastructure providers to identify viable solutions to deliver infrastructure where appropriate by phasing conditions, the use of interim measures and the provision of co-located facilities.

The site layout shows an on-site sewage treatment plant is proposed. Final details can be secured by condition to meet JCS policy 10 (b), (c) and (d).

Effect on noise To ensure quality of life and safer and healthier communities the JCS at policy 8 (e) (ii) states that new development should be prevented from contributing to or being adversely affected by unacceptable levels of noise.

Chapter 15 of the revised NPPF gives advice on how local planning authorities should prevent new development from being adversely affected by unacceptable levels of noise pollution. The NPPF further advises that decisions should aim to avoid noise from giving rise to significant adverse impacts on health and quality of life as a result of new development.

The PPG offers detailed advice on Noise which was updated on 24 December 2014.

The Environmental Health team advise that there are no nearby properties that are likely to be significantly adversely affected by noise or dust from construction activities, however, it would be prudent to consider noise and dust impacts in a construction environmental management plan.

Subject to the imposition of a condition relating to a construction management plan the proposed development would comply with policy 8 (e)(ii) of the JCS.

Planning Committee 107 of 131 3 February 2021

Effect on air quality To ensure quality of life and safer and healthier communities the JCS at policy 8 (e) (i) requires development not to have an unacceptable impact on amenities by reason of pollution, whilst 8 (e) (ii) goes further by stating that both new and existing development should be prevented from contributing to or being adversely affected by unacceptable levels of air pollution.

Policy 15 (c) of the JCS seeks for the design of development to give priority to sustainable means of transport including measures to contribute towards meeting the modal shift targets in the Northamptonshire Transportation Plan.

The proposed development includes the provision for vehicle parking. A key theme of the revised NPPF is that developments should enable future occupiers to make "green" vehicle choices and paragraph 110 (e) "incorporate facilities for charging plug-in and other ultra-low emission vehicles".

The Environmental Health team advise that electric vehicle charging facilities have been incorporated into the design (within the garage) and the house is intended to meet very high energy efficiency standards. Adverse impacts on air quality are expected to be very low.

Subject to a condition to secure electric vehicle charging points, the development would comply with JCS policies 8 (e) (i) and 15 (c) and NPPF paragraph 110 (e).

National space standards The JCS at Policy 30(b) requires the internal floor area of new dwellings to meet the National Space Standards as a minimum.

The Planning Statement at page 25 demonstrates that the dwelling layout will meet the national space standards. The development would therefore comply with policy 30 (b) of the JCS.

National accessibility standards Policy 30 (c) seeks new dwellings to meet category 2 of the National Accessibility Standards as a minimum.

The Statement shows that the dwelling has been designed to be wheelchair accessible at ground floor level (pages 26-29). A condition should be imposed to ensure compliance with policy 30 (c) of the JCS on the ground floor of the dwelling.

Effect/impact on the living conditions of the neighbouring occupiers and the future occupiers of the development The JCS at policy 8 (e) (i) details policy relating to the protection of amenity of neighbouring occupiers.

At paragraph 127 of the revised NPPF the government requires new development to provide 'a high standard of amenity for all existing and future users.

The nearest property to the dwelling is Dungee House to the east. The house is approximately 70 metres from the nearest part of the proposed dwelling. At this distance there will be no adverse amenity impact on Dungee House. The proposed

Planning Committee 108 of 131 3 February 2021

garden will abut the garden of Dungee House and a new hedgerow boundary is proposed. This is appropriate for the rural context.

No neighbour objections have been received.

Overall, the amenity impact is acceptable. The proposed development would comply with policy 8 (e) (i) of the JCS.

Effect/Impact on highway safety in relation to (the proposed access arrangement and parking provision) JCS Policy 8 seeks to create connected places and safe and pleasant streets. Part (a) requires new development to integrate into the wider settlement, connect to existing services and facilities.

JCS policy 8(b) states development should prioritise the needs of walking, cycling and public transport over car use and resist developments that would prejudice highway safety. Development should ensure a satisfactory means of access and provision for parking, servicing and manoeuvring in accordance with adopted standards.

Under the Northamptonshire parking standards 2016, new dwelling houses with 4 bedrooms are expected to provide 3 on-site parking spaces. The proposed site plan includes an area of hardstanding for the parking of a least 4 vehicles and a double garage, which meets the size standard (5.8 metres x 6 metres). The parking area is below the size standard of 3 metres x 5.5 metres. The access can achieve the necessary 2 metres by 2 metres pedestrian to vehicle visibility above of height of 0.6 metres. The driveway width is 3.6 metres which is above the maximum of 3.3 metres for a single dwelling access. Given the need to maintain the maximum length of the existing hedgerow, the smaller size could be achieved via condition.

The Northamptonshire parking standards 2016 require 1 cycle parking space per bedroom. Two cycle spaces are shown. A total of 5 cycle parking spaces should be provided.

The highways authority raise no objection, subject to the conditions. The parish council raise the concern that the new access is close to the Dungee Corner junction which is known for accidents. The junction is within Bedford Borough and that council has been asked to comment. No comments have been received. Accident records have been requested from the highways authority.

Subject to conditions to meet the highways standards, the development would meet JCS policy 8 (b) (i) and (ii).

Contamination The JCS at policy 6 says that local planning authorities will seek to maximise the delivery of development through the re-use of suitable previously developed land within the urban areas. Where development is intended on a site known or suspected of being contaminated a remediation strategy will be required to manage the contamination. The policy goes on to inform that planning permission will be granted where it can be established that the site can safely and viably be developed with no significant impact on either future users of the development or on ground surface and waters.

Planning Committee 109 of 131 3 February 2021

The revised NPPF at paragraphs 178 and 179 sets out policies on development involving contaminated land. The planning practice guidance also offers detailed government advice on this topic.

The Environmental Protection team recommend a condition regarding unexpected contamination. Subject to the condition, the proposal would meet policy 6 of the JCS and paragraphs 178-179 of the NPPF.

Crime and disorder Section 17 of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998 details the need for the Council to do all that it reasonably can to prevent, crime and disorder in its area.

The JCS at policy 8 (e) (iv) sets out the policy requirement for new development to seek to design out crime and disorder and reduce the fear of crime. The adopted designing out crime supplementary planning guidance gives detailed advice this issue.

The revised NPPF at paragraph 127(f) states that decisions should aim to ensure that developments create safe, inclusive and accessible environments which promote health and wellbeing with a high standard of amenity for existing and future users and where crime and disorder, and the fear of crime, do not undermine quality of life or community cohesion and resilience.

The Police have raised that the access should meet the requirements of the Northamptonshire Fire and Rescue Service and of Building Regulation B5 - Access and Facilities for the Fire Service.

Also, all doors and windows should meet the requirements of Approved Document Q of Building Regulations. Northamptonshire Police recommend the use of third party accredited products.

Plan 19 1014 (68) 01 has been provided to show fire vehicle access. The Police have confirmed that this meets the requirements of Building Regulation B5.

The development will therefore meet JCS policy 8 (e) (iv).

Social dimension The proposal would be a windfall that would have a very minor benefit for housing supply, however, its location would be contrary to adopted development plan strategy. The supply benefit would be marginal and the site's location, well away from the village of Bozeat, would not be easily accessible to services and facilities. Its development would do very little to support the vitality of the settlement.

Conclusion The proposed development is contrary to Development Plan policy in that it is for a single dwelling within the open countryside. The proposal is not an individual dwelling of exceptional quality or innovative design and therefore is not an exception permissible under JCS policy 13 (2) (a).

The development would therefore be contrary to policies 13 (2) (a), 9, 3 (a) and 8 (d) (i) and (ii) of the JCS.

Planning Committee 110 of 131 3 February 2021

The proposed development is not considered to meet the requirements of NPPF policy 79 (e). The development is not of exceptional quality, in that it is neither truly outstanding nor innovative. The development would not help raise design standards more generally in rural areas, would not significantly enhance its immediate setting and is not sensitive to the defining characteristics of the local area.

The appeal decision APP/H2835/W/18/3194108 dated 31/12/18 is a material consideration against the proposal. The views of the OPUN design review are also a material consideration and have been taken into account.

The proposed development is therefore recommended for refusal.

RECOMMENDATION Refuse for the following reasons.

REASONS

1. The proposed development would be development in the countryside outside of a defined settlement boundary. The development does not meet the requirement for individual dwellings in the open countryside to be of exceptional quality or innovative design. The development is contrary to policies 8 (d) (i) and (ii), 11 (2) (a) and (b) and 13 (2) (a) of the North Northamptonshire Joint Core Strategy and policy SS1 of the Plan for the Borough of Wellingborough.

2. The proposed development is not of exceptional quality in that it is neither truly outstanding or innovative. The 'reveal' concept has not been fully reflected on the site as a whole. The proposal fails to demonstrate the design is particularly innovative, and the main innovative measure is not available and the measures to reduce light spill would be at the discretion of the occupier. The impact on the design concept of the proposal of using solar panels on the green roofs has not been considered. The development would be contrary to paragraph 79 (e) of the National Planning Policy Framework.

3. The development would not help raise design standards more generally in rural areas. The use of solar pantiles is not possible and the impact of solar panels on the design has not been considered. The control of light spill into the rural landscape would be at the discretion of the occupier. The large urban design of the access gate is not appropriate to a rural location. The development is contrary to paragraph 79 (e) of the National Planning Policy Framework.

4. The proposal would not significantly enhance its immediate setting. The development would introduce a large building into the open setting, with a prominent incongruous feature two-storey section and a large urban style gate within a rural hedgerow. The development is contrary to policies 3 (a) and 8 (d) (i) and (ii) of the North Northamptonshire Joint Core Strategy and paragraph 79 (e) of the National Planning Policy Framework.

5. The proposal is not sensitive to the defining characteristics of the local area. The dwelling is located within a sensitive location, adjacent to an SSSI, where clear rural

Planning Committee 111 of 131 3 February 2021

views are possible over the Dungee Meadow SSSI. These views are currently not interrupted by buildings. The side (western) elevation visible from Harrold Road would be angular and a mix of materials and features not common to the area, including the timber shutters. The southern elevation facing the road would highlight the urban style of the gate and the angular two-storey section. The scale of the dwelling on the plot is large, contrary to the local character. The development is contrary to paragraph 79 (e) of the National Planning Policy Framework.

INFORMATIVE/S 1. The plans and documents relating to this decision are; Site Location Plan 19-1014(90)01 (received 9/10/20) Tree Protection Plan 01 (received 9/10/20) Tree Survey & Constraints Plan 01 (received 9/10/20) Ground Floor Plan 19-1014(06)11 (received 9/10/20) First Floor Plan 19-1014(06)12 (received 9/10/20) Roof Plan 19-1014(06)13 (received 9/10/20) North West East Elevations 19-1014(06)21 (received 9/10/20) South and Courtyard Elevations 19-1014(06)22 (received 9/10/20) Site Section North South Existing and Proposed 19-1014(06)31 (received 9/10/20) Site Section West East Existing and Proposed 19-1014(06)32 (received 9/10/20) Topographical Survey 19-1014(90)03 (received 9/10/20) Site Layout 19-1014(90)04 (received 9/10/20) Landscape Plan 19-1014(94)01 (received 9/10/20) Landscape Impact Assessment, Green Planning Studio, June 2020 including Appendices L1-L4 (received 9/10/20) Landscape Assessment Appendix L5 Revised (received 11/1/21) EDNA Survey for Great Crested Newts, Bernwood ECS Ltd dated 22 June 2020 Issue 1 (received 9/10/20) Preliminary Ecological Appraisal, Bernwood ECS Ltd, 25 February 2020, Issue 2 (received 9/10/20) Design and Access, Sustainability and Planning Statement, Green Planning Studio, October 2020 (received 9/10/20) Reveal House, Green Planning Studio, July 2020 Report to Design Surgery (received 9/10/20) Design Response to Design Review, Green Planning Studio Limited, 23 November 2020 (received 26/11/20) Tree Survey, Impact Assessment and Method Statement, RJ Tree Services Ltd, December 2020, Rev 01 (received 9/12/20) Street Elevation Existing and Proposed 19-1014(06)33 (received 15/12/20) Email from Ruth Reed of Green Planning Studio Ltd to Susan Garbutt dated 14/12/20 10:36 (received 14/12/20) North West East Elevations shutters fully open 19-1014(06)23 (received 16/12/20) North West East Elevations shutters fully closed 19-1014(06)24 (received 16/12/20) South and Courtyard elevations shutters fully open 19-1014(06)25 (received 16/12/20) South and Courtyard elevations shutters fully closed 19-1014(06)26 (received 16/12/20) Access for the Fire Service 19-1014(68)01 (received 16/12/20) Sageglass images in clear state and 1% light transmission at night (received 16/12/20) SageGlass information - Environmental Product Declaration Electrochrommatic

Planning Committee 112 of 131 3 February 2021

Insulating Glass Unit (IGU) Saint-Gobain Sageglass Triple Pane and Triple Pane Vario IGU, issued 1/1/20 (received 16/12/20) 2. In accordance with the provisions in the Town and Country Planning (Development Management Procedure) (England) Order 2015 and pursuant to paragraph 38 of the National Planning Policy Framework, where possible and feasible, either through discussions, negotiations or in the consideration and assessment of this application and the accompanying proposals, the council as the local planning authority endeavoured to work with the applicant/developer in a positive and proactive way to ensure that the proposed development is consistent with the relevant provisions in the framework. 3. Link to Policies for Refusals - http://www.nnjpu.org.uk/docs/Joint%20Core%20Strategy%202011- 2031%20High%20Res%20version%20for%20website.pdf

Planning Committee 113 of 131 3 February 2021

APPENDIX 1

Appeal Decision Hearing held and site visit made on 23 October 2018 by Brendan Lyons BArch MA MRTPI IHBC an Inspector appointed by the Secretary of State Decision date: 31st December 2018

Appeal Ref: APP/H2835/W/18/3194108 Dungee Corner, Harrold Road, Bozeat, Wellingborough NN29 7LD  The appeal is made under section 78 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 against a refusal to grant planning permission.  The appeal is made by Ms R Taylor against the decision of the Borough Council of Wellingborough.  The application Ref WP/16/00670/FUL, dated 27 October 2016, was refused by notice dated 4 October 2017.  The development proposed is the erection of a single dwelling and formation of a vehicular access.

Decision

1. The appeal is dismissed.

Preliminary matters

2. Since the appeal was submitted, national planning policy has been updated by the publication in July 2018 of the revised National Planning Policy Framework (‘NPPF’). This decision must have regard to the current policy. The Council’s appeal statement refers to the revised NPPF. The appellant did not take up the opportunity to update the submitted appeal statement, but spoke on the revised national policy context at the Hearing.

3. Amended versions of the site layout, ground floor plan and rear elevation were submitted in March 2017. The architect’s view was that these were first put forward informally for comment, but the Statement of Common Ground submitted at the Hearing records that they are the plans on which the Council took its decision and which should form the basis of the appeal.

Main Issue

4. The main issue in the appeal is whether the proposal would accord with national and local policy on the location of rural housing, with particular regard to the quality of its design and environmental performance.

Reasons

5. The appeal site lies in open countryside, some 2 km to the east of the village of Bozeat. The site comprises a rectangular plot, some 0.2 hectares in area, which was formerly an orchard or extended garden of the detached house that stands at the junction of Harrold Road and Dungee Road. The plot has a frontage to Harrold Road, defined by a hedgerow with several mature trees,

https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate Appeal Decision APP/H2835/W/18/3194108

and is enclosed on two sides by a large field and on the fourth side by the rather overgrown garden of the existing house. The field has been designated as a Site of Special Scientific Interest (‘SSSI’) because its traditional management as a hay meadow supports the presence of diverse grasses and a locally rare orchid.

6. Permission is sought to erect a two-storey house and a single-storey detached garage, with a new access to be formed from Harrold Road. The house would be essentially T-shaped in plan with a mono-pitched zinc roof over each arm of the T. The walls would be finished in painted render but much of the Harrold Road elevation would be screened by full-height CorTen steel panels, perforated with a pattern inspired by images of the grasses found in the SSSI. No plans have been provided for the garage, but an illustration in the submitted Design and Access Statement (‘DAS’) suggests that it would be similar in form and materials to the house. The new access would be flanked by high rendered walls, with a pair of tall CorTen steel gates, also with a perforated pattern.

7. The house is intended to deliver very high levels of environmental performance and would be designed to achieve ‘Passivhaus’ standards.

Policy context

8. The development plan policies relevant to this appeal are contained in the North Northamptonshire Joint Core Strategy 2011-2031, adopted in July 2016 (‘CS’). It is common ground that the detailed approach to development within rural settlements stated by saved Policy G4 of Borough of Wellingborough Local Plan (as altered in 2004), and by Policy SS1 of the emerging Plan for the Borough of Wellingborough, for which the final examination report was imminent at the time of the Hearing, are not critical to the appeal decision.

9. CS Policy 11 defines a network of settlements, and seeks to limit development in the rural areas, with any new housing to be located within or at the edge of villages. This is consistent with the guidance of the NPPF1 that sustainable development in rural areas will require housing to be located where it will enhance or maintain the vitality of rural communities.

10. CS Policy 8 sets place-shaping principles, with Part (d) of the policy requiring development to create a distinctive local character by responding to the site’s immediate and wider context, drawing on the best of local character without stifling innovation. CS Policy 9 sets requirements for new buildings to be sustainable, particularly in terms of energy and water usage.

11. CS Policy 13 sets out the exceptions to the general restraint on rural development set by Policy 11. Part 2 of Policy 13 confirms that new residential development in the open countryside will not generally be permitted unless it would either (a) be of exceptional quality or innovative design or (b) house an essential rural worker.

12. Notwithstanding a fractional difference in wording, Part 2(a) is clearly drafted to reflect the general advice against isolated dwellings in the countryside stated by paragraph 55 of the NPPF 2012. The policy refers to supporting text2 which quotes the final bullet point of paragraph 55, including the four criteria for a

1 NPPF 2018 paragraph 78, formerly at NPPF 2012 paragraph 55 2 CS paragraph 5.42 https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 2 Appeal Decision APP/H2835/W/18/3194108

potential dwelling with exceptional quality or innovative nature of design. It is common ground that this is the key policy context against which the appeal proposal must be tested. Indeed, the planning application was put forward expressly as a ‘paragraph 55’ proposal.

13. A main thrust of the appellant’s case is that innovation alone should satisfy the exception and that a proposal could be innovative in terms of exceptional environmental performance rather than necessarily in terms of aesthetic or other values. The reason for refusal of the planning application states that a zero carbon development is insufficient, in itself, without an accompanying exceptional design. Clearly the former NPPF wording on which the CS policy is founded identifies “exceptional quality or innovative nature”, and again “truly outstanding or innovative”, as alternatives. But they are cited as aspects of good design, which in my understanding necessitates a satisfying resolution of all aspects of the proposal rather than merely of technical performance alone. This is confirmed by the requirement that all proposals should “reflect the highest standards of architecture”. This could not be achieved by a proposal that was less than fully convincing and deeply satisfying in both aesthetic and functional terms. It would not be sufficient, as was asserted at the Hearing, for a proposal to be of only “good” design even if displaying a high level of innovation.

14. The updated form of the 2018 NPPF tends to confirm this interpretation. The headline requirement is now for the proposal’s design to be of “exceptional quality”, and the four criteria of the 2012 text have now been amalgamated into two bullet points, with an even more closely aligned link between truly outstanding or innovative design and the need to meet the highest standards of architecture. The requirement of the second bullet point for a proposal to significantly enhance its immediate setting would not in any way reduce the need for outstanding design, as the appellant now seems to suggest. It was agreed at the Hearing by both parties that “exceptional quality” represented a high bar, not easily met.

Design quality

15. In my assessment, the appeal proposal could not be classed as a truly outstanding piece of design. Externally, the design of the house itself would be assured but for the most part unremarkable, in a relatively conventional contemporary idiom of plain rendered walls, large metal-framed windows and standing-seam metal roofs finishing in a tapered edge. However, the simple palette of materials would be affected by the solar array that would cover virtually all of one main roof slope, but is not shown on the submitted elevations.

16. The design’s most distinguishing feature would be the incised CorTen panels which would screen the entrance door and a large part of the south elevation. These would add interest to those two areas, but would have little impact on the remainder of the exterior, particularly the elevation facing the SSSI. Internally, the house’s sequence of rooms and modest double-height spaces would be attractively planned but would not elevate the design to an exceptional standard.

17. As shown by the examples in the DAS, perforated screens have become increasingly used in recent years as an elevational device, with the added

https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 3 Appeal Decision APP/H2835/W/18/3194108

ability to filter light and create dynamic shadow patterns. Therefore, this most distinctive aspect of the design could not in principle be classed as innovative.

Environmental performance

18. The screens would have a benefit in counteracting solar gain. However, the DAS has little to say on their environmental role, or indeed on the way in which the design has been influenced by the demands of the Passivhaus standard. A later document submitted for the Council’s sustainability audit acknowledges that the normal Passivhaus preference for main living rooms to be south-facing has in this instance been reversed to allow maximum views over the adjoining SSSI field. The architect confirmed at the Hearing that the design sought to strike a balance between the logic of energy efficiency and the desire to respond to the site. Therefore, it appears that the design would not provide a classic illustration of Passivhaus principles.

19. The audit has confirmed that, subject to implementation of the detailed measures specified by the designers, the dwelling should achieve zero carbon performance and very low water usage. The Council accepts that the proposal would readily comply with CS Policy 9 and that, although there would be scope for further measures such as electric car charging, the house’s environmental performance would be exemplary. However, I agree with the Council that achievement of this standard, which relies on a combination of very high insulation values and a range of now commercially available technologies, cannot be regarded as truly innovative in its own right.

Setting

20. The reason for refusal of the application raises a specific concern about the angular features of the proposed design. I accept that angular overhanging roofs are not a feature of vernacular design in the area, and that materials such as standing seam metal are more often associated with an urban context. However, there is no reason in principle why an outstanding design could not successfully employ such devices while also achieving the objective of significant enhancement of the immediate setting. CS Policy 8 expressly envisages the scope for innovation.

21. In terms of the appeal proposal blending with the local context, much would depend, for example, on the choice of colour for the render finish. The earthy tones of the CorTen panels would also fit quite well with the natural rural context. The same would be true of the proposed entrance feature, where the rendered walls flanking the CorTen could be toned to mitigate the effect of starkness against the otherwise green road frontage.

22. However, even with such measures, the introduction of the house as currently put forward would not represent an enhancement of the setting. The design and layout of the house are intended to be expressive of the relationship with the adjoining SSSI. However, the gates and wall would provide a tall barrier that would prevent rather than allow worthwhile glimpses of the meadow beyond. I agree with the Council that the CorTen screens would be largely hidden from view from the road. And where glimpsed, their abstract pattern would not readily suggest the reference to the flora of the SSSI, which is designated for scientific rather than landscape value. As discussed at the Hearing, some prior knowledge would be needed in order to understand the pattern.

https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 4 Appeal Decision APP/H2835/W/18/3194108

23. Apart from the screens, there is little indication of the landscape having been a key generator of the site layout and design. While the architect has confirmed a desire to avoid a suburban-style rear garden, the plans give little hint of integration with the adjoining field. The amendment to add some free-standing CorTen pieces in the garden would not succeed in making meaningful links between the design of the house and the SSSI. The site planning is not fully resolved in other respects, with the approach from the west exposing views of the back of the garage.

24. Overall, the proposal would not satisfy the requirements of CS Policy 8(d).

Raising standards

25. The construction of a house of such high environmental performance would be a worthy addition to the local housing stock. Local standards would also be raised by a bespoke design that would seek, even if not fully successfully, to produce a unique response to context. The house’s benefits would be likely to be disseminated by reputation, such as by citation in other planning proposals. There would also be the opportunity for wider knowledge of the house through the annual public visits to the SSSI. The proposal would comply in this respect with CS policy 13.

Social dimension

26. The Council accepts that the proposal would be a windfall that would have a very minor benefit for housing supply, but that its location would be contrary to adopted and emerging development plan strategy. I agree with the Council that the supply benefit would be marginal and that the site’s location, well away from the village, would not be easily accessible to services and facilities. Its development would do very little to support the vitality of the settlement.

Conclusion

27. The scope for raising standards would not alone be sufficient to justify approval of the appeal proposal. For the reasons set out above, I find that the proposed design would not satisfy the criteria of the development plan, as stated by CS Policies 13 and 8, or of national policy contained in the updated NPPF, and that there are no other material considerations that would support the proposal. I therefore conclude that the appeal should be dismissed.

Brendan Lyons

INSPECTOR

https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 5 Appeal Decision APP/H2835/W/18/3194108

APPEARANCES

FOR THE APPELLANT:

Ruth Reed Green Planning Studio Gwyn Jones Raab Design Ruth Taylor Appellant Mark Witty Supporting Appellant

FOR THE LOCAL PLANNING AUTHORITY:

Debbie Kirk Senior Development Management Officer Julie Thomas Director Freddie Humphries Barrister

DOCUMENTS

1 Ruth Reed biographical note 2 Signed Statement of Common Ground 3 CS Policies 2, 3 , 15, 30 4 Extract from PBW draft Policy H2 5 Documents submitted for sustainability audit: 5.1 E-mail summarising SAP calculations 5.2 Full SAP calculations 5.3 Plan showing layout of rainwater harvesting system 5.4 Quotation for detailed design of rainwater harvesting system 5.5 Diagrams of rainwater storage tank 5.6 Passivhaus Statement 5.7 Energy and Sustainability Statement 5.8 Plan showing extent of solar PV array 5.9 SAP report

https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 6 APPENDIX 2

Debbie Kirk Development Management Officer T: 01933 23 1934 E: [email protected]

Green Planning Studio Limited Date: 13 January 2020 Unit D Lunesdale Upton Magna Business Park Your Ref: Shrewsbury Shropshire Our Ref: PRE/19/00099/PREF SY4 4TT

FAO Beth Lautman

Dear Madam

Application No: PRE/19/00099/PREF Proposal: Proposed dwelling Location: Dungee Corner, Harrold Road, Bozeat, Wellingborough, Northamptonshire, NN29 7LP, Case Officer: Debbie Kirk

I write with reference to your recent pre-application enquiry received on 19 November 2019 in connection with the above. Your enquiry was accompanied by drawing numbers 19 1014 (90) 01 (OS location plan scale 1:1250); 19 1014 (90) 02 (site landscape general arrangement); 19 1014 (90) 03 (OS location plan scale 1:1250); 19 1014 (03) 10 (floor plans, basement, ground and first); 19 1014 (03) 11 (elevations) and a design statement by Green Planning Studio dated November 2019.

Background Planning permission reference WP/16/00670/FUL for the erection of a two storey dwelling and the formation of a new vehicular access (as shown on page 28 of Green Planning Studio statement) was refused by the BCW planning committee on 4 October 2017 for the following reason:

“Notwithstanding the varied materials proposed, the proposed design of the new dwelling, due to its angular features, would not go beyond the high quality expected of all development to a level that could be considered exceptional. A zero carbon development, is insufficient, in itself, to meet the test of being innovative without an accompanying exceptional design. In addition, the proposed rendered wall and Cor Ton gates represent an alien feature in the verdant setting development in the open countryside. Therefore, the proposal does not reach the standard required to provide the special justification for an isolated new house in the countryside in accordance with paragraph 55 of the National Planning Policy Framework. As such the proposal is contrary to policies 8 (d) (i) and (ii) and 13 (2) (a) of the North Northamptonshire Joint Core Strategy”.

Swanspool House, Doddington Road, Wellingborough, Northamptonshire NN8 1BP Tel: 01933 229777 www.wellingborough.gov.uk

A subsequent appeal was dismissed by the Planning Inspectorate on 31 December 2018. The inspector in his assessment considered that the appeal proposal design quality could not be classed as a truly outstanding piece of design, the proposed design was not considered to be of an exceptional standard or innovative.

In terms of environmental performance the design did not provide a classic illustration of Passivhaus principles due to the main living rooms being reversed to allow maximum views over the adjoining SSSI fields. Although subject to the implementation of detailed measures the dwelling should achieve zero carbon usage and low water usage through high insulation values and a range of commercially available technologies these could not be regarded as truly innovative in their own right. There was little indication of the landscaping being the key generator for the site layout and design, the plans were considered by the planning inspector to give little hint to the integration with the adjoining field. The approach from the west, exposing views of the back garage were considered to be unresolved.

The inspector concluded that “the scope for raising standards would not alone be sufficient to justify approval of the appeal. The proposed design was not found to satisfy the criteria in the development plan as stated by policies 8 (d) and 13 (2) of the JCS or national policy contained within the NPPF.

The Proposed Development This pre-application enquiry seeks an entirely new proposal for a single dwelling on the site. The scheme is for a house of exceptional and innovative design and is proposed under paragraph 79 of the NPPF 2019. The proposed building would be curved in plan form and features a ‘glulam’ timber framed structure with kitchen/dining/living accommodation, home office and three bedrooms on the ground floor. A master suite and outdoor terrace is proposed on the first floor. A meadow turf roof is proposed for the new building. In addition, a suite of landscape proposals include areas of ornamental planting, spring meadow, lawn and an orchard, plus space for growing vegetables and soft fruits, as well as provision for hens/chickens. Access to the site is proposed directly off Harrold Road.

Consultations Design Midlands design review panel received a briefing from the senior planning officer at BCW, visited the site and received a scheme presentation and discussion session on Tuesday 26 November 2019. The views of the design review panel were sought by the local planning authority/your client to ascertain whether or not the design of the proposed dwelling is of exceptional quality in that it is truly outstanding or innovative, reflecting the highest standards of architecture, and would help to raise design standards in the rural area more generally; The Design Midlands review panel provided your clients with the panels written comments on the proposed scheme on 10 December 2019.

Consultations have been carried out and responses received from Northamptonshire highways, Northamptonshire archaeology advisor, the council’s policy officer, the council’s landscape officer and would comment as follows:

Conformity with the Development Plan Section 38(6) of the Planning & Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 replaces section 54(A) of the Town & 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 plan, unless material considerations indicate otherwise:

The development plan for the purposes of this statutory provision comprises:

 The North Northamptonshire Joint Core Strategy (JCS);  Borough of Wellingborough Local Plan (LP)

Relevant Adopted Policies: North Northamptonshire Joint Core Strategy (JCS) Policy 1 (Presumption in Favour of Sustainable Development); Policy 3 (Landscape Character); Policy 4 (Biodiversity and Geodiversity); Policy 8 (North Northamptonshire Place Shaping Principles); Policy 9 (Sustainable Buildings); Policy 11 (The Network of Urban and Rural Areas); Policy 13 (Rural Exceptions); Policy 28 (Housing Requirements); Policy 29 (Distribution of New Homes); Policy 30 (Housing Mix and Tenure)

Plan for the Borough of Wellingborough (PBW) Policy SS1 (Villages);

Principle of Development This pre-application proposal is for the development of a single dwelling in the open countryside near to the village of Bozeat. The site is clearly outside any defined village boundary as set out under policy SS1 of the PBW, it is situated immediately adjacent to the ‘Dungee Meadow SSSI’ and a single existing dwelling with associated outbuildings.

The site was subject to a similar planning application in 2016 (WP/16/00670/FUL). This application was refused by the council and dismissed by the Planning Inspectorate at an appeal hearing. Many of the policies and issues identified during both the determination and appeal process for this previous application will still be relevant. It should be noted that since the previous appeal, the PBW has been formally adopted replacing the saved policies in the Wellingborough Local Plan 2004. The PBW can now be given full weight in decision making. Policy 11 of the JCS limits rural development to that which is required to support a prosperous rural economy or to meet a locally arising need. It also says that development in the open countryside will be resisted unless it meets the special circumstances set out in Policy 13 of the JCS.

Policy 13 (2) (a) and (b) of the JCS says that open countryside development will normally not be granted permission unless it is for an individual dwelling of exceptional quality or innovative design or if it is for a rural worker to meet the specific needs of a rural business.

Paragraph 79 states:

“Planning policies and decisions should avoid the development of isolated homes in the countryside unless one or more of the following circumstances apply: a) there is an essential need for a rural worker, including those taking majority control of a farm business, to live permanently at or near their place of work in the countryside; b) the development would represent the optimal viable use of a heritage asset or would be appropriate enabling development to secure the future of heritage assets; c) the development would re-use redundant or disused buildings and enhance its immediate setting; d) the development would involve the subdivision of an existing residential dwelling; or e) the design is of exceptional quality, in that it: - is truly outstanding or innovative, reflecting the highest standards in architecture, and would help to raise standards of design more generally in rural areas; and - would significantly enhance its immediate setting, and be sensitive to the defining characteristics of the local area

It is clear from the submitted documents that this proposal is intending to create an exceptional or innovative dwelling in accordance with policy 13 2 (a) of the JCS and paragraph 79 of the NPPF. The previous scheme refused on the site also tried to deliver such a dwelling.

On that occasion both the BCW and the planning inspector felt that the dwelling fell short of the standards required to meet this policy requirement of being exceptional/innovative in its design.

The Inspector felt that whilst the scheme could be seen to have a high level of innovation, the design of the dwelling was not good enough to be considered exceptional.

In determining this proposed scheme, the officer’s would have to be satisfied that it was both innovative and of an exceptional design quality; that it would help to raise standards of design more generally in rural areas; and that it would significantly enhance its immediate setting and be sensitive to the defining characteristics of the local area.

The proposed design of the dwelling would have to be assessed as to whether it is of sufficient design quality and innovativeness to meet the very high requirements for a paragraph 79 dwelling.

Paragraph 5.43 of the JCS states that within North Northamptonshire truly outstanding and innovative will ‘only be the case where proposals provide innovative standards of sustainable design, in excess of those set out in policy 9 and national regulations, and make an outstanding contribution to the character of the landscape, promoting and reinforcing local distinctiveness. These matters require rigorous assessment given the protection afforded to open countryside. Promoters of such schemes should therefore seek early advice through an accredited design review to provide an independent assessment of the proposal.’

To summarise this proposal would need to be judged in accordance with policy 13(2) (a) of the JCS and paragraph 79 of the NPPF in order to be acceptable in principle as a development in the open countryside. The design of the scheme must therefore be both exceptional and innovative in order to comply with these policies. In order to assess whether the scheme meets these criteria an independent accredited design review should be undertaken.

It is noted that planning permission for a dwelling was refused and dismissed on appeal on the site in 2018. A material consideration would be to consider whether this proposed pre- application enquiry dwelling has addressed the reasons for the dismissing of the appeal.

These and other material considerations are discussed in detail below:

Effect on archaeology JCS policy 2 (d) requires that where proposals would result in the unavoidable and justifiable loss of archaeological remains, provision should be made for recording and the production of a suitable archive and report.

Northamptonshire archaeological advisor advises that the site is located on the north side of Harrold Road, east of the village of Bozeat. Immediately to the east of the site is the projected line of the Roman road from Water Newton, which continues to the south of the site through Dungee Wood and has been projected as far as Kempston in Bedford. In the field to the north of the site the county Historic Environment Record indicates the presence of a number of cropmarks interpreted as Iron Age and Romano-British settlement, based on finds from field walking and a poorly documented minor excavation. The cropmarks include enclosures and possible building platforms. The Dungee Barn Second World War searchlight battery was also located in this field and some of the cropmarks are therefore likely to relate to this. There is the potential for archaeological remains to survive on the site, albeit truncated.

On balance, given the likelihood of truncation and also my advice on the previous refused planning permission, Northamptonshire archaeological officer would not require detailed archaeological information such as an evaluation to be included with an application for the site. The potential for archaeological remains to be present can be addressed by use of a suitable condition for a programme of archaeological works should any planning permission be granted.

Subject to the imposition of a condition for a programmed of archaeological works the proposed scheme would comply with policy 2 (d) of the JCS.

Landscape Character Policy 3 (a), the JCS seeks to conserve and where possible enhance the character and qualities of the local landscape. Policy 3 (b) of the JCS requires that development make provision for retention and, where possible enhancement of features of landscape importance. Policy 3 (e) of the JCS requires that development provide appropriate landscape mitigation.

Design Midlands design review panel considered that:

“A sensitive response to the landscape character of the site is an essential part of the project, with the same degree of rigour applied to both building and landscape.

Attention was drawn to the special landscape (wildflower meadow and SSSI) immediately north of the site, as well as the established trees / hedges on and close to the site. In addition, Dungee Plantation lies immediately to the east of Dungee Road. As proposed, the Panel questioned how the curved building form and new landscape integrates with the landscape character and features, as well as the role / function of the proposed spaces and the proposals for site boundaries, etc.

The Panel commented on the need to develop a compelling landscape strategy which seeks to ensure a robust relationship between the built and natural forms”.

The panel recommended that any landscape strategy should include the following: - A detailed analysis of the existing green infrastructure to evidence an in-depth understanding of the green character and qualities of the site; - An explanation of how the landscape proposals reference / reinforce the ‘reveal’ design concept and narrative for the scheme; - Definition of the role and function of the proposed areas of landscape as part of a ‘hierarchy of spaces’, including how the spaces connect with each other; - Provision of a ‘Tree Strategy’ based on a considered approach to existing and new trees. This should build on the findings from the arboricultural survey and might involve exploring the selective removal of trees to the northern boundary to enable a stronger relationship with the meadow, as well as clarifying the role / function of new trees, for example as focal points, or referencing/relating to the single tree in the meadow, etc. - A design concept for the site boundaries, which should include an understanding of the character of the existing boundaries (which were noted to vary in character and form), as well as an understanding on how the landscape proposals connect to the site boundaries, including the boundary treatment between the site and the existing house/garden and pig sties, etc.; - Careful consideration concerning the palette of materials for the landscape proposals (including hard landscape spaces, access etc.) drawn from an understanding of the context. The opportunity to utilise materials for the building within the landscape was encouraged, with the potential to create a more cohesive scheme; and - Creating a strong sense of arrival through considered landscape and building proposals, heightening the notion of ‘reveal’.

Whilst the scheme seeks to retain a number of trees along the southern boundary Harrold Road and along the northern boundary with the SSSI, I would agree with the comments made by the design review panel that the landscape general arrangement scheme shown on drawing number 19 1014 (90) (02) would not be sensitive or responsive to the landscape character of the site or integrate with the adjacent SSSI. A carefully thought out landscape strategy should be developed from information obtained in an up to date tree survey and an up to date extended phase 1 protected habitats survey. Any planning application would need to be accompanied by an up to date tree survey, a landscape strategy which responds to the points made by the design review panel set out above, a detailed hard and soft landscape strategy and a detailed landscape scheme, including trees to be retained, removed, replaced, hedgerows to be retained, removed and replanted, shrubs and other native wildflower meadows etc to be replanted. Any detailed landscaping scheme should include planting numbers/mixes. There should be a focus on using native species and surfacing which are found locally to this part of Northamptonshire/Bedfordshire.

As proposed the scheme would be contrary to policy 3 (a), (b) and (e) of the JCS.

Biodiversity and Geodiversity The JCS at policy 4 - biodiversity and geodiversity, sets out policy requirements for the protection and where possible, a net gain in biodiversity.

Protected Species An ‘Extended Phase 1 Habitat Survey’ exercise would be required to support any planning application and consider the effects on adjacent Dungee Corner Meadow Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI). There may be potential for bats, badgers, reptiles, nesting birds or other protected species to be found on the site. If bats, badgers, nesting birds or other protected species are found then details of mitigation measures including any licences should be provided. You should refer to the Biodiversity SPD for information on what surveys might be required and how to proceed. If you have any queries with the above content please contact the Northamptonshire principal project officer Heather Webb on 01604 361 210 or email [email protected]

Natural England considers that “the proposed pre-application enquiry, as submitted, should not adversely affect the interest features of Dungee Corner Meadow Site of Special Scientific Importance (SSSI). Given the proximity of the proposal site to the SSSI and the associated potential for damage as a result of storage or disposal of materials, and operation of machinery or plant within the SSSI, should the council be minded to grant permission, Natural England recommend that the following informative is appended to any consent:

The applicant is advised that should storage, access or encroachment within the Dungee Corner Meadow Site of Special Scientific Importance (SSSI) found to occur as a result of the proposals during or after the works, this will be considered an offence under Section 28 of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (as amended) whereby the applicant may be liable on summary conviction to a maximum fine of £20,000 or on conviction on indictment to an unlimited fine”

Natural England recommends that the following should be imposed as condition on any planning permission:

“All contractors working on site should be made aware of the informative and should be provided with a map that clearly shows the boundaries of the Dungee Corner Meadow Site of Special Scientific Importance (SSSI) in relation to the development site”.

Biodiversity Enhancements The NPPF at chapter 15 'conserving and enhancing the natural environment' sets out government views on minimising the impacts on biodiversity, providing net gains where possible and contributing to halt the overall decline in biodiversity.

In the previous appeal decision on this site the Inspector was not convinced that the proposed design would enhance the setting of the SSSI, as required by policy 4 of the JCS stating in his report that, “the introduction of the house as currently put forward would not represent an enhancement of the setting. The design and layout of the house are intended to be expressive of the relationship with the adjoining SSSI. However, the gates and wall would provide a tall barrier that would prevent rather than allow worthwhile glimpses of the meadow beyond. I agree with the Council that the CorTen screens would be largely hidden from view from the road. And where glimpsed, their abstract pattern would not readily suggest the reference to the flora of the SSSI, which is designated for scientific rather than landscape value.” (paragraph 22).

It is considered that the proposed scheme would not overcome the above concerns raised by the planning inspector, as the proposed dwelling would largely behind gates, a hedgerow and a tall wall and the first glimpses would be of the doors serving the guest wing rather than views through to the SSSI.

The internal layout should be redesigned to provide the heart of the dwelling being revealed once the site is entered, with views being provided from the front to the back and glimpses of the SSSI.

Further, consideration needs to be given to the Harrold Road frontage by providing a scheme which responds to the character of the street edge, with perhaps a dense and mature landscape boundary in contrast to the open character of the adjacent meadow and heighten the sense of arrival, including further work on the treatment / materials and landscape experience on arrival to communicate the ‘reveal concept’ of the dwelling at the entrance.

An on-site biodiversity enhancement plan should accompany any planning application which includes mitigation measures such as the planting of native species, the provision of opportunities for nesting bats and birds such as bird/bat boxes or bricks etc.

As proposed the scheme would be contrary to policy 4 of the JCS.

Design of an Exceptional Quality Paragraph 79 (e) of the NPPF states:

“Design is of exceptional quality, in that it: - is truly outstanding or innovative, reflecting the highest standards in architecture, and would help to raise standards of design more generally in rural areas; and - would significantly enhance its immediate setting, and be sensitive to the defining characteristics of the local area”.

The planning inspector stated that there is a “requirement that all proposals should “reflect the highest standards of architecture”. This could not be achieved by a proposal that was less than fully convincing and deeply satisfying in both aesthetic and functional terms. It would not be sufficient, as was asserted at the hearing, for a proposal to be of only “good” design even if displaying a high level of innovation,” (paragraph 13) and that “it was agreed at the hearing by both parties that “exceptional quality” represented a high bar, not easily met,” (paragraph 14), concluding that, “In my assessment, the appeal proposal could not be classed as a truly outstanding piece of design. Externally, the design of the house itself would be assured but for the most part unremarkable, in a relatively conventional contemporary idiom of plain rendered walls, large metal-framed windows and standing-seam metal roofs finishing in a tapered edge. However, the simple palette of materials would be affected by the solar array that would cover virtually all of one main roof slope, but is not shown on the submitted elevations.” (paragraph 15).

The design of the proposed scheme represents an entirely new proposal for a single dwelling on the site. The currently proposed building would be curved in plan form and features a ‘glulam’ timber framed structure with kitchen/dining/living accommodation, home office and three bedrooms on the ground floor. A master suite and outdoor terrace is proposed on the first floor. A meadow turf roof is proposed for the new building.

Design Midlands design review panel have reviewed the proposed scheme. The panel drew your client’s attention to the very demanding requirements of paragraph 79 (e) of the NPPF and the need to provide a robust case for development. In order to succeed, a clear and compelling rationale is vital, informed by a thorough understanding of the site and wider surroundings, for example its history,

Design Concept The design panel considered that felt that the narrative for the scheme could be clearer and more compelling. Your client’s design team should undertake further research and design development to crystallize the vision and capture the ‘essence’ of the project in a simple statement supported by diagrams. The panel recommended that the landscape proposals should contribute to, support and reinforce the design concept.

Building Form Layout The design panel review considered that the curved plan form of the building was somewhat arbitrary and did not reflect the fact that Dungee Meadow and Harrold Road have very different characters. In addition, the rationale for the internal layout of the building was questioned, including the fact that the proposed guest bedroom block appears as the most prominent part of the building on arrival, and the cloakroom / utility room obstructs the view of the meadow from the building entrance. Officers at BCW would concur with this point. Design review panel in their comments have encouraged your client’s design team to revisit this, in order to: - Strengthen the relationship of the house with the meadow, which is a key character defining feature of the site. Suggestions include positioning the house to the northern edge of the site immediately adjacent to the meadow which will require the selective removal of trees (dependent on the findings of any tree survey); an internal layout which maximises opportunities for views to the meadow to both the north and the west, for example an unobstructed view from the building entrance to the meadow and exploring opportunities for the character of the meadow to extend into site; - Reconsider the approach to the Harrold Road frontage by providing a scheme which responds to the character of the street edge, with perhaps a dense and mature landscape boundary in contrast to the open character of the meadow; - Heighten the sense of arrival, including further work on the treatment / materials and landscape experience on arrival to communicate the ‘reveal concept’ of the dwelling at the entrance, as well as the creation of a focal ‘heart’ within the building, exploring opportunities for further elements of ‘reveal’/surprise; - Explore the potential of flexibility in use, in tune with the client’s desire to accommodate extended family when required for example. a design which fully explores the potential for parts / sections of the house to be ‘closed down’ when not in use.

Design Recommendations The design review panel identified gaps in the site analysis work that need to be addressed in order to evidence a comprehensive understanding of site conditions and local characteristics (buildings and landscape). Once completed, this should then be used in the development of a more compelling design narrative, which truly responds to its context.

The design panel suggests the following steps: - Undertake additional analysis to ensure a comprehensive understanding of the site and local environs, including arboricultural survey, ecological assessment, map regression exercise, building character study, etc. -Develop a more robust and compelling vision and narrative for the development; -Create a comprehensive landscape strategy which should include proposals for tree retention/loss/replacement, space hierarchy, approach to hedgerows, boundaries, etc.; -Further consider the building form, scale and materiality, including design options explored as part of the design process; and -Strengthen visual relationship to the meadow.

It is considered that whilst the design concept of a curved building on the site with a first floor element incorporating a green roof to reflects the adjacent Dungee Corner Meadow picks up on points raised in the council’s statement of case further consideration needs to be given to the siting, layout and design of the proposed dwelling and its associated landscape setting, addressing the points raised by the design review panel. Any siting, layout, design and landscaping should be unique and bespoke to this site.

The proposed design is not considered to be of exceptional quality. It is not truly outstanding or innovative, reflecting the highest standards in architecture, thereby helping to raise standards of design more generally in rural areas. The design and associated landscaping would significantly enhance its immediate setting, and be sensitive to the defining characteristics of the local area. The proposed design has not addressed the points raised in relation to design. As proposed the scheme would be contrary to policies 13 (2) (a) and policy 8 (d) (i) and (ii) of the JCS and advice contained within paragraph 79 (e) of the NPPF.

Environmental Performance The planning inspector and the BCW agreed that the previous proposal for a dwelling which was dismissed at appeal would be in accordance with policy 9 of the JCS in terms of sustainability, however as noted in paragraph 5.43 of the JCS, to be innovative the scheme would need to exceed this. Your client would need to demonstrate that any amended scheme for a dwelling would exceed the requirements of policy 9 of the JCS and that it would meet the water use standards set out in policy 9, limiting internal water use to no more than 105 litres/person/day and external water use to no more than 5 litres/person/day.

However, both the council and the planning inspector considered that complying with policy 9 of the JCS through the reliance of a combination of very high insulation values and a range of now commercially available technologies, cannot be regarded as truly innovative in its own right. (paragraph 19).

It is noted that in the Green Planning Studio statement dated November 2019 states that the proposed dwelling will be designed and delivered to Passivhaus standards but not certified as such and integrated PV panels in zinc panels on the first floor will provide sufficient on-site generation for domestic use, including heating water and to power electric cars. The scheme also includes whole house ventilation with heat recovery and the roofs will collect and store grey water for use in the house and garden. The sewerage system will be bio-digester with extra filtration to remove nitrates. However, these are all commercially available commercially available technologies and not innovative in their own right. The proposed dwelling would not be a true Passsivhaus and such a dwelling is no longer considered to be innovative in its own right.

The council would expect as a minimum any proposed dwelling on the site to achieve zero carbon emissions and to be truly innovative any proposed dwelling should be returning power back to the grid. This should be explored. Details of any ground source heat pump to be installed and PV panels should be included within any sustainability statement and on any elevations.

A sustainability sustainable urban drainage scheme train assessment should detail all the avenues explored to mitigate the surface water outfall from the site and how this will be managed.

The council would expect details to be provided of any grey water storage scheme to be provided as part of any sustainability statement and the use of underground tanks for the storage of excess water if required should be incorporated into any scheme. In relation to the sewerage system details of the scheme to be installed should be provided within any sustainability statement.

The design review panel recommended that your client should consider the orientation of the dwelling and scope to maximise passive solar gain as part of any fully integrated sustainability strategy.

It is considered that your client needs to consider further the environmental performance of the building, any proposed dwelling should generate as a minimum zero carbon emissions, exceed the standards set out under policy 9 of the JCS, and consider whether any innovative measures other than commercially available technologies could be incorporated within any proposed dwelling. Any proposed dwelling should be ideally totally self-sufficient in terms of environmental performance.

Air Quality Paragraph 110 of the NPPF encourages new development to incorporate charging of electric and other ultra-low emission vehicles in safe, accessible and convenient locations. This should be detailed as part of any full application.

National space standards Policy 30 (b) seeks to ensure the internal floor area of new dwellings must meet the national space standards as a minimum to provide residents with adequate space for basic furnishings, storage and activities.

Any new dwelling would be expected to meet as a minimum the national space and storage standards. These can be found on the following link: https://www.gov.uk/guidance/housing-optional-technical-standards

Any single and double bedrooms should confirm with the technical requirements in relation the width and gross internal floor area of the room. These measurements should clearly be annotated on any submitted floor plans.

National accessibility standards Policy 30 (c) requires new dwellings to meet category 2 of the proposed National Accessibility Standards as a minimum.

Any new dwelling would be expected to meet as a minimum category 2 of the national accessibility standards and any plans should demonstrate how the dwelling would meet this standard.

Effect/Impact on the Living Conditions of the Neighbouring Occupiers and the Future Occupiers of the Development The JCS at policy 8(e)(i) details policy relating to the protection of amenity of neighbouring occupiers.

The proposed layout which accompanied the pre-application enquiry has been designed to minimise the effects of the development on the amenities of the existing house in terms of effects on outlook, light and privacy. Any site layout plan should show the application site in its context and accurately plot existing dwelling, outbuildings, garage and boundary treatments. Impact on Highway and Parking JCS policy 8 (b) (i) gives a number of requirements that new development should achieve with regards to highway, pedestrian and other sustainable transport matters.

Policy 8 (b) (ii) seeks to ensure that developments have a satisfactory means of access and provision for parking, serving and manoeuvring in accordance with adopted standards.

Northamptonshire highways recommend that the proposed development must have regard for the following requirements of the local highway authority. As submitted the proposals do not comply with the requirements of the local highway authority and provide reasons for refusal on highway safety or capacity grounds.

It is suggested that, because of the lack of a public transport service, its distance from local services and reliance on the use of a car, the development may not be sustainable.

Parking accommodation should be provided in accordance with the Northamptonshire Parking Standards and satisfy policy 8 (b) (ii) of the JCS. A five bedroom unit should provide four allocated parking spaces and one cycle parking space per bedroom. Please note garages do not count as parking spaces for vehicles but should be appropriately sized for cycle storage. Any proposed parking area should contain adequate parking spaces and turning area to enable vehicles to enter and leave the parking area in a forward gear.

The vehicular crossing must be constructed and all highway surfaces affected by the proposals reinstated in accordance with the specification of the local highway authority and subject to a suitable licence/agreement under the Highways Act 1980.

Works to remove, accommodate or protect existing street furniture or features such as street lighting columns, trees, traffic signs or the apparatus of service providers must be agreed with the local highway authority or statutory undertaker and carried out at the cost of the applicant.

To prevent loose material being carried onto the public highway the driveway must be paved with a hard bound surface for a minimum of 5 metres in rear of the highway boundary. Any site layout plans should detail the hard surface material(s) to be used on the driveway.

A positive means of drainage must be installed to ensure that surface water from the driveway does not discharge onto the highway. Details of the positive means of drainage to be installed should be included on any site layout plan.

Pedestrian to vehicle visibility of 2.0 metres x 2.0 metres above a height of 0.6 metres must be provided and maintained on both sides of the vehicular access. Details of Pedestrian to vehicle visibility must be shown on any site layout plan.

Vehicle to vehicle visibility of 2.0 metres x 215 metres, as far as applicable must be provided and maintained on both sides of the vehicular access. Details of vehicle to vehicle must be shown on any site layout plan.

The proposed development would not comply with policy 8 (b) (i) and (ii) of the JCS.

Contamination The JCS at policy 6 says that local planning authorities will seek to maximise the delivery of development through the re-use of suitable previously developed land within the urban areas. Where development is intended on a site known or suspected of being contaminated a remediation strategy will be required to manage the contamination. The policy goes on to inform that planning permission will be granted where it can be established that the site can safely and viably be developed with no significant impact on either future users of the development or on ground surface and waters.

The revised NPPF at paragraphs 178 and 179 sets out policies on development involving contaminated land. The planning practice guidance also offers detailed government advice on this topic.

The council's environmental protection officer (contamination) has no comments or objections to make on this application for land contamination.

The proposed development would comply with policy 6 of the JCS.

Conclusion This pre-application enquiry proposal for the development of a single in the open countryside to the east of Bozeat lies outside the any defined village boundary under policy SS1 of PBW.

The site was subject to a similar planning application in 2016 (WP/16/00670/FUL). Planning permission reference WP/16/00670/FUL for a single dwelling under paragraph 79 (formerly paragraph 55) was refused by the council and a subsequent appeal hearing was dismissed by the planning inspectorate. The appeal decision is a material planning consideration in the assessment of this pre-application enquiry. Many of the policies and issues identified during both the determination of the refused planning permission and appeal process will are still relevant. However, since the appeal decision was issued, PBW has been formally adopted replacing the saved policies in the Wellingborough Local Plan 2004. The PBW can now be given full weight in decision making.

Policy 11 (2) (a) of the JCS limits rural development to that which is required to support a prosperous rural economy or to meet a locally arising need. It also says that development in the open countryside will be resisted unless it meets the special circumstances set out in Policy 13 of the JCS.

Policy 13 (2) (a) of the JCS states that open countryside development will normally not be granted permission unless it is for an individual dwelling of exceptional quality or an innovative design or if it is for a rural worker to meet the specific needs of a rural business. It is clear from the current submission that this proposal is intending to create an exceptional or innovative dwelling in accordance with policy 13 (2) of the JCS and paragraph 79 of the NPPF. The previous scheme refused planning permission and subsequently dismissed at appeal on the site also tried to deliver such a dwelling.

Both the BCW and the planning inspector felt that the dwelling fell short of the standards required to meet both the policy requirement set out under policy (2) (a) and advice contained under paragraph 79 (e) of the NPPF being neither exceptional or innovative in its design, nor significantly enhancing its immediate setting and being sensitive to the characteristics of the local area.

Having reviewed the currently proposed dwelling which would be of a curved design with a first floor element and a green roof to reflects the adjacent Dungee Corner Meadow and taken into consideration consultation responses further consideration needs to be given to the siting, layout and design of the proposed dwelling and its associated landscape setting, addressing the points raised by the design review panel. Any siting, layout, design and landscaping should be unique and bespoke to this site.

The proposed design fails to reach the high bar of exceptional quality. It is not truly outstanding or innovative, reflecting the highest standards in architecture, thereby helping to raise standards of design more generally in rural areas. The design and associated landscaping would significantly enhance its immediate setting, and be sensitive to the defining characteristics of the local area. The proposed design has not addressed the points raised in relation to design raised by the planning inspector in the appeal which was dismissed. As proposed the scheme would be contrary to policies 13 (2) (a) and policy 8 (d) (i) and (ii) of the JCS and advice contained within paragraph 79 (e) of the NPPF.

Whilst the scheme seeks to retain a number of trees along the southern boundary Harrold Road and along the northern boundary with the SSSI, both the design review panel and officers at BCW considers that the landscape general arrangement scheme shown on drawing number 19 1014 (90) (02) would not be sensitive or responsive to the landscape character of the site or integrate with the adjacent SSSI. A carefully thought out landscape strategy should be developed from information obtained in an up to date tree survey and an up to date extended phase 1 protected habitats survey. As proposed the scheme would be contrary to policy 3 (a), (b) and (e) of the JCS.

The internal layout should be redesigned to provide the heart of the dwelling being revealed once the site is entered, with views being provided from the front to the back and glimpses of the SSSI.

Further, consideration needs to be given to the to the Harrold Road frontage by providing a scheme which responds to the character of the street edge, with perhaps a dense and mature landscape boundary in contrast to the open character of the adjacent meadow and heighten the sense of arrival, including further work on the treatment / materials and landscape experience on arrival to communicate the ‘reveal concept’ of the dwelling at the entrance. The scheme as proposed would be contrary to policy 4 of the JCS.

Your client needs to consider further the environmental performance of the building, any proposed dwelling should generate as a minimum zero carbon emissions, exceed the standards set out under policy 9 of the JCS, and consider whether any innovative measures other than commercially available technologies could be incorporated within any proposed dwelling. Any proposed dwelling should be ideally totally self-sufficient in terms of environmental performance.

Northamptonshire highways recommend that the proposed development must have regard for the requirements set out above of the local highway authority in relation to vehicle to vehicle visibility, pedestrian to vehicle visibility splays, details of drainage channels to prevent surface water disposing directly onto the highway and details of surfacing materials. As submitted the proposals do not comply with the requirements of the local highway authority and provide reasons for refusal on highway safety or capacity grounds.

The scheme for a proposed dwelling under policy 13 (2) (a) of the JCS and advice contained within paragraph 79 of NPPF as proposed for the reasons set out above would not be supported by officer and would be recommended for refusal as it fails to reach the high bar of being a truly outstanding or innovative, reflecting the highest standards in architecture, thereby helping to raise standards of design more generally in rural areas. The design and associated landscaping would significantly enhance its immediate setting, and be sensitive to the defining characteristics of the local area. The proposed design has not addressed the points raised in relation to design made by the planning inspector.

Your client should carefully consider the points raised in this response and should they wish to proceed with a new dwelling under policy 13 (2) (a) of the JCS and advice contained within paragraph 79 of NPPF, submit a further pre-application enquiry and seek further design advice on the project including detailed design element from the Midlands design review panel.

However, should you client wish to proceed with a detailed planning application the following documents should accompany any submission:

A Planning Statement; A Design and Access Statement including historic mapping, all concept designs, characteristics of the site, characteristics of buildings around the site, the mapping of key views of the site; A Tree Survey including root protection measures showing the existing and proposed development; A detailed landscape plan, showing trees to be retained, removed and landscape mitigation; A phase 1 ecology survey including any relevant mitigation surveys; Biodiversity enhancement plan to include bat and bird boxes and the planting of native species etc; Surface water drainage strategy; Sustainability Assessment; Proposed site layout plan showing the proposed dwelling, outbuildings, garage, parking proposed access, pedestrian/vehicular visibility splays and trees to be retained; Proposed elevation plans including materials and a coloured version; An existing and proposed finished floor levels and ground levels, including cross sections; Existing site layout plan; Plans confirming that the dwelling would comply with the national space standards and the technical requirements set out in those standards; Plans confirming compliance with the national accessibility standards category 2;

The advice given above is the informal opinion of an Officer only and it will not fetter or bind other Officers or Councillors if they are called upon to make a recommendation or take a decision on any formal planning application.

In addition, the Council cannot accept responsibility for any action you or your client may take as a result of receiving this advice. Furthermore, this advice has been formulated without the benefit of receiving comment from other statutory and non- statutory consultees or responses from members of the public which could result in a different recommendation to the advice given.

Yours faithfully,

Debbie Kirk Senior Development Management Officer

BOROUGH COUNCIL OF WELLINGBOROUGH

Planning Committee 3 February 2021

Report of the Principal Planning Manager

Extension of time (if applicable): 4 February 2021

Case Officer Ms Susan Garbutt WP/20/00744/FUL

Date received Date valid Overall Expiry Ward Parish 10 November 2020 13 November 2020 8 January 2021 Hatton

Applicant Mr and Mrs Douglas Kemp

Agent Mr Adam Smith

Location Tulip Lodge 85 Harrowden Road Wellingborough Northamptonshire NN8 5BD

Proposal The erection of a new 3 no. bed, 6 no. person detached dwelling house in the rear garden of the existing property; Tulip Lodge on Harrowden Road in Wellingborough. Including the creation of a new access road from Roche Way and the erection of a detached double garage

PLANNING HISTORY WP/2002/0607 Application withdrawn/undetermined 20.11.2002 1 no. detached dwelling access via adjoining site subject to concurrent application WP/2002/0606 (3 dwellings). WP/1992/0180 Approved with conditions 04.06.1992 Extension to existing dwelling and double garage and garden store BW/1974/0724 Approved with conditions 15.01.1975 Proposed garage and garden store WU/0067/0018 Approved 08.02.1967 House and garage WU/1964/0211 Approved with conditions 09.12.1964 Three dwellings The adjacent site (now 16a and 16b Roche Way, which would share the access to the proposed dwelling) has the following relevant planning history: WP/2004/0030/C Approved All conditions of WP/2003/0067/RM appeal decision WP/2003/0220/RM Approved 21/5/03 1 dwelling (reserved matters of WP/2002/0082/O) WP/2003/0067/RM Refused 26/3/03 – Appeal Allowed 18/12/03 Details relating to 2 detached dwellings WP/2002/0759/F Refused 29/1/03 3 detached dwellings WP/2002/0606/F Refused 4/12/02 3 detached dwellings

Planning Committee 114 of 131 3 February 2021

WP/20/00744/FUL

AY 5 E W 1 ROCH

1

4 1

E 83.0m

13

25

2

1 6

1

8

0

3

a

8

2

2

8

9 8

Whytewell E

Pavilion House

b

6

1

5 8

Tulip Lodge

a

6 1

The Wickets

1 8

H

A

R

Tall Trees R

O

W

D

E

N

7 7 R

O

A

D

Hillcrest

3 7 17

Honingham

18

ICT Services © Crown Copyright and database right 2021. Scale: Ordnance Survey 100018694. Legend This map is accurate 1:800 Cities Revealed to the scale specified Aerial Photography copyright: when reproduced at A4 WP/20/00744/FUL Tulip Lodge 85 Harrowden Rd Wellingborough ± GetMapping PLC 1999

WP/2002/0082/O Approved 19/6/02 Outline for 2 dwellings

Reason(s) for committee consideration

- the application has attracted 4 or more written objections from households local to the application site

THE SITE AND SURROUNDINGS The site is within the defined urban area of Wellingborough and is within a residential area. The site includes an access from Roche Way. The site includes part of the rear garden of Whytewell (89 Harrowden Road) and part of the large garden of Tulip Lodge (85 Harrowden Lodge). The access from Roche Way is an existing access point that serves a small number of garages, and also is the access point for a drive that serves 2 dwellings (16a and 16b Roche Way). The site access is on a slight incline from Roche Way but the main part of the site is flat.

The proposed access is bounded by 6 garages and the garden of Whytewell to the east and number 18 Roche Way and the access to 16a and 16b Roche Way to the west. The part of the site where the dwelling is proposed is bounded by the garden of Tulip Lodge to the east, the garden of Tall Trees to the south, the garden of 17 Redwell Road to the west and 16a Roche Way to the north.

The site lies within the 3km buffer zone for the Upper Nene Gravel Pits Special Protection Area.

APPLICATION PROPOSAL AND BACKGROUND The proposal seeks planning permission for the creation of a private drive from Roche Way to serve a new 3 bedroom detached dwelling of a contemporary design and detached double garage with store above. The proposal includes a bin collection point and off-road parking for 3 vehicles. Solar panels are proposed to a south facing roof slope.

The applicant received pre-application enquiry advice from the local planning authority on the proposal under reference PRE/20/00027/PREF. The advice given can be summarised as follows: A residential infill on this site is acceptable in principle. No dwelling design was submitted so no comments on the design could be provided. Concern was raised regarding views into neighbouring properties. An application should be accompanied by a landscape and biodiversity enhancement scheme. The access should be 6.0 metres in width and meet the standards of the local highway authority in terms of angle and gradient. The access must meet the requirements of access for fire and rescue vehicles. Guidance was provided on policies covering sustainability, noise and air quality, space and accessibility standards, contamination and crime.

During the application the applicant has provided a written response to the comments raised (received 18/1/21), and additional plans; a Site Section and Solar Shading plans showing the relationship of the proposed dwelling with the adjacent dwelling 16a Roche Way (received 22/1/21). The additional plans were consulted upon for 7 days.

Planning Committee 115 of 131 3 February 2021

NATIONAL GUIDANCE, DEVELOPMENT PLAN POLICY AND SUPPLEMENTARY PLANNING DOCUMENTS/GUIDANCE National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) (19 February 2019) Planning Practice Guidance (PPG) National Design Guide (PPG) (September 2019)

North Northamptonshire Joint Core Strategy - Part 1 of the local plan (JCS) Policies: 1 (presumption in favour of sustainable development) 2 (historic environment) 3 (landscape character) 4 (biodiversity and geodiversity) 5 (water environment, resources and flood risk management) 6 (development on brownfield land and land affected by contamination) 8 (North Northamptonshire place shaping principles) 9 (sustainable buildings and allowable solutions) 11 (network of urban and rural areas) 20 (Nene and Ise valleys) 28 (housing requirements and strategic opportunities) 29 (distribution of new homes) 30 (housing mix and tenure)

Plan for the Borough of Wellingborough - Part 2 of the local plan (PBW) Policy Wellingborough inset map

Neighbourhood plans: None relevant.

Supplementary planning documents/guidance: Sustainable Design Biodiversity Upper Nene Valley Special Protection Area Trees and Landscape SPD Planning Out Crime in Northamptonshire Northamptonshire Parking Standards (September 2016) Northamptonshire Highway Development Management Strategy (December 2013) Highways Standing Advice for 1-5 dwellings (June 2016)

SUMMARY OF REPLIES TO CONSULTATIONS/REPRESENTATIONS RECEIVED 1. Northamptonshire Highways - recommend refusal. The applicant has failed to demonstrate that the development would not have a detrimental effect on highway safety and capacity.

Further comments received 19/1/21 - it is accepted that the total number of vehicle movements that will be generated by the existing and proposed development will not exceed that generated by the equivalent number of four bedroomed dwellings. It is further noted that the inspector responsible for the appeal APP/H2835/A/03/1114338 confirmed that the access and the visibility along Roche Way is acceptable. An informative regarding a right of access over the garage court land is recommended to

Planning Committee 116 of 131 3 February 2021

protect the interests of existing and future occupiers and to ensure that they enjoy free and legal rights to gain access to their property.

2. Natural England - the Strategic Access Management and Monitoring (SAMM) payments may act as standalone mitigation for this type of application, as per the guidance in the Supplementary Planning Document (SPD).

3. Wellingborough Norse - I can confirm that the bins would need to be presented in Roche Way.

4. Landscape Officer - no comments received.

5. County Archaeology - no comments received.

6. Northamptonshire Fire and Rescue - no comments received.

7. Police Crime Prevention Design Advisor - no comments received.

8. County Ecology - no comments received.

9. Neighbours - a total of 9 neighbour objections have been received from occupiers of properties in the vicinity of the site in Roche Way and Redwell Road and 1 letter of comment.

These are summarised as follows:

- Constrained access for construction vehicles as Roche Way is small and garage access is narrow, and would block access to 16a/b, potential damage to the garage court, noise and dust, no construction management plan offered; - Refuse trucks should not block the access to 16a/b; - No site notice posted and no consultation letters received; - Drainage is a problem; - Driveway will go past 18 and will lead to loss of privacy; - Children play at the garages; - Any lighting of the driveway will shine into adjacent properties; - Cars already get blocked in/out of the garage court; - Contrary to policy G1(1-5) of the Wellingborough Local Plan as per the previous refused applications; - Vehicles are always parked at the entrance to the garage court, by 16/18 Roche Way so the access is not clear; - The dwelling will overlook neighbours gardens with no screening; - The applicant or Tulip Lodge do not have right of access over the garage court; - The new dwelling and Tulip Lodge are not affordable properties and will not address housing needs; - The site plan does not show the projecting 'box' to the side; - The drawings do not show the height of the dwelling compared to neighbours; - No details of impact on daylight to neighbours; - Loss of daylight to the front of 16a; - There is a height difference between the Whytewell land and the garage court and no details as to the impact on the trees there; - Removal of green space will impact on surface water absorption;

Planning Committee 117 of 131 3 February 2021

- Design is stark contrast to the neighbouring properties; - Designs are not accurate; - Overdevelopment of the plot; - Windows will overlook 16a; - Overshadowing of 16a; - Rear terrace will overlook neighbours; - Access road is curved preventing line of sight for vehicles entering and exiting; - Lights from vehicles on the access drive will cause light pollution to neighbours; - Concern over future property numbering; - Bin collection is not appropriate, bins should be collected at roadside as per current practice; - More bins for collection outside 16 not appropriate; - Cars reversing out of the garages would conflict with the driveway and there is a blind spot; - No access rights for services to the site; - The plans do not accurately show Tall Trees sun lounge and patio; - Height is excessive in comparison to neighbours (8090 proposed, neighbours are 6788, 6500 and 6800); - Height of garage and dwelling overbearing on Tall Trees; - Amenity impact (noise) on Tall Trees; - Wish to see the pre-application advice given; - The access is not the necessary width for the use proposed; - Need drainage to ensure no water on the communal area or onto Roche Way; - The access serves 2 dwellings and 6 garages and a parking space between garages and rear access to number 18 (total 10); - The garages are used for storage and cars park on the shared area for loading; - Concern water main required to site to provide fire hydrant; - Need artist impression from the neighbours viewpoint; - Lorries cannot use the access; - No line of sight between the access and the access to 16a/16b; - Tree removal not addressed; - Northamptonshire Policy DM11 for swept path and clear access is not met by the communal garage space; - Development will bring pollution right up to neighbours gardens; - Should be required to re-surface communal garage area, as per the permission for 16a/16b, and be partly responsible for upkeep; - Restrictive covenant required to prevent further development on the site;

ASSESSMENT AND REASONED JUSTIFICATION The proposal raises the following main issues:

- conformity with the development plan and material considerations; - design, layout and the effect on the character and appearance of the surrounding area; - effect/impact on highway safety in relation to the proposed access arrangement and parking provision; - effect/impact on the living conditions of the neighbouring occupiers and the future occupiers of the development; - compliance with national space standard, national accessibility standards and affordable; - effect on flood risk and surface water drainage;

Planning Committee 118 of 131 3 February 2021

- effect on foul sewage; - effect on noise: - noise on air quality; - effect on biodiversity; - effect on the Upper Nene Valley Special Protections Area; - contamination; - crime and disorder

Conformity with the development plan and material considerations Section 38(6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 states that "If regard is to be had to the development plan for the purposes of any determination to be made under the Planning Acts, the determination must be made in accordance with the development plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise".

Policy 1 of the JCS is clear that when considering development proposals, the local planning authority will take a positive approach that reflects the presumption in favour of sustainable development as set out within the revised NPPF.

In addition to the specific NPPF requirements set out above, paragraph 128 states that 'applicants will be expected to work closely with those affected by their proposals to evolve designs that take account of the views of the community. Applications that can demonstrate early, proactive and effective engagement with the community should be looked on more favourably'.

The site is located within Wellingborough town, within the defined extent of the town, defined by the Town Inset Map in the PBW. Policies 28 and 29 of the JCS set out the housing requirement for the Borough and state that Wellingborough is to be the focus for housing growth in the Borough.

The Council can currently demonstrate a 5 year supply of deliverable housing sites (6.76 years as stated in the published August 2020 Housing Land Supply Report) and so the Development Plan is considered up to date, in accordance with the NPPF.

The site history is a material consideration in the determination of this application. The council's historic planning records indicates that the site has had one previous application for a dwelling (reference WP/2002/0607), but this application was withdrawn so has no weight in the consideration of this application.

The site is an infill plot for 1 dwelling within the town boundary and as such is acceptable in principle, subject to all other relevant Development Plan policies being met, and material consideration.

Design, layout and the effect on the character and appearance of the surrounding area JCS at policy 8 (d) (i) and (ii) states that development should create distinctive local character by responding to the site's immediate and wider context and local character to create new streets, spaces and buildings which draw on the best of that local character without stifling innovation and respond to the local topography and the overall form, character and landscape setting.

Planning Committee 119 of 131 3 February 2021

The government at paragraph 127 (a) - (d) of the revised NPPF attach great importance to the design of built development. It goes on to advise that planning decisions should ensure that development will function well and add quality of the overall area; not just for the short term but over the life time of a development; are visually attractive as a result of good architecture, layout and appropriate and effective landscaping; are sympathetic to local character and history, including the built environment and landscape setting, while not discouraging appropriate innovation and change; establish or maintain a strong sense of place, using the arrangements of streets, space, building types and materials to create attractive, welcoming and distinctive places to live, work and visit.

The National Design Guide, illustrates how well-designed places that are beautiful, enduring and successful can be achieved in practice. It forms part of the Government's collection of planning practice guidance and should be read alongside the separate planning practice guidance on design process and tools.

The proposed dwelling is two storeys and of a contemporary design. The dwelling has a high eaves level and projecting gable features to the front and rear which are fully glazed. The dwelling will be constructed of random coursed rough cut Northamptonshire sandstone, a zinc clad roof (pigmento green) and the projecting gables will consist of black anthra-zinc cladding as will the roof of that section of the dwelling. The small first-floor side projection will include a small area of red tile hanging. Windows and rooflights are to be powder coated aluminium in grey. The proposed double garage is detached and will also be constructed in random coursed rough cut Northamptonshire sandstone, a zinc clad roof (pigmento green). The garage has a tall dual pitched roof to enable loft storage. The pitched roof is the same pitch as the projecting gables on the dwelling.

The proposed design and materials are a clear contrast to surrounding dwellings, which are constructed of red brick with brown tile and white or brown windows, and some dwellings have stone detailing around the windows.

The dwelling will not be visible within the street scene of Roche Way, or Harrowden Road. The long access drive is curved and will be defined by a 2.0 metre boundary to Whytewell. Although the dwelling will be positioned further forward (east) in the plot than the adjacent 16a, the new dwelling will be well screened by an existing tall hedgerow boundary to 16a which is to be retained.

Neighbours have commented that the design is out of character with the neighbours, in terms of its height, design and materials. The submitted plans show the ridge height of the dwelling is proposed to be 8.09 metres and the garage height is 5.83 metres, but do not show the heights of neighbours. An additional Site Section plan was received 22/1/21 which shows the height of the proposed dwelling in relation to the nearest neighbour 16a Roche Way. The plan shows that the eave and ridge levels of the proposed dwelling will be higher than the adjacent 16a. The ridge of the new dwelling will be 48cm higher. The eaves level of 16a is not clear on the drawing and so photos have been requested from the neighbour.

From the submitted information, the height of the proposed dwelling will be out of character with the adjacent dwelling 16a Roche Way. In addition, the design and

Planning Committee 120 of 131 3 February 2021

access statement does not provide any reasoning behind the choice of design and materials and how they reflect the location.

Overall, the proposed design, in terms of scale, design and materials does not reflect the site's immediate and wider context and local character, contrary to JCS policy 8 (d) (i) and (ii).

Effect/Impact on highway safety in relation to the proposed access arrangement and parking provision JCS policy 8 (b) (i) states development should prioritise the needs of pedestrians, cyclists and public transport users and resist developments that would prejudice highway safety.

JCS policy 8 (b) (ii) states development should ensure a satisfactory means of access and provision for parking, servicing and manoeuvring in accordance with adopted standards.

The NPPF requires the development has safe and suitable access to the site can be achieved for all users, that development should be refused on highway grounds if there would be an unacceptable impact on highway safety (paragraphs 108-9). Paragraph 110 (c) supports developments that create places that are safe, secure and attractive, minimise the scope for conflicts between pedestrians, cyclists and vehicles and respond to local character and design standards.

Vehicular and Pedestrian Access The site is proposed to be accessed from Roche Way. There is an existing access point off Roche Way serving 6 garages and the 2 dwellings 16a and 16b Roche Way, and a parking space between the garages and the rear of 18 Roche Way. The new dwelling would be accessed via a private drive off the shared space within the garage court. The access would be 3.0 to 3.1 metres wide for a distance of approximately 67 metres.

The planning history is a material consideration. The reserved matters application for 16a and 16b Roche Way was granted on appeal. The Inspector's decision dated 18/12/03 notes that the shared private drive would not meet the standard of 4.5 metres wide for the first 10 metres. The drive would be 3.78 metres wide for a distance of 3 metres and this was judged to be 'of adequate standard for the scale of development proposed' (Inspector's Decision paragraph 11).

The highways authority originally objected to the proposed dwelling as the private drive off Roche Way would serve more than 5 dwellings (defined by the access to the car parking for a maximum of 5 dwellings) and the access would serve 3 dwellings and the garages of 6 other dwellings. This is contrary to policy DM15 of the Northamptonshire Highway Development Management Strategy (December 2013) which states 'Northamptonshire County Council will not allow more than 5 dwellings independent of their own direst highway frontage to be served off a shared private drive'. This is because this 'may create problems for residents, utilities, refuse collection and emergency access' and 'issues regarding access rights, parking, management and maintenance of shared accesses serving more than 5 dwellings often results in friction between neighbours' (page 30-31).

Planning Committee 121 of 131 3 February 2021

The highways authority have confirmed that the access standard of hard bound surface of 4.5 metres wide for the first 10 metres still applies. The access within the garage court is 25 metres long and hard bound, but only 3 metres wide.

The applicant submitted further comments regarding the access on 7/1/21. The applicant notes that the County Council guidance allows five, four bedroomed (and above) dwellings to access a private drive. This equates to a minimum number of parking spaces and vehicles (based on NCC Standards) of 20. The proposal would result in a total number of spaces of 17, based on one space per garage, three spaces for the proposed dwelling and four spaces for no. 16a and 16b. In terms of potential number of vehicles the proposal is below the NNC guidance. The highways authority have accepted this and have withdrawn their objection.

The highways authority recommend that an informative be added to any permission regarding the need to ensure a legal right of access over the garage court.

To address concerns raised about whether the site access width meets the requirements of Building Regulation B5 - Access and Facilities for the Fire Service, the applicant has agreed to provide a fire hydrant on site. Fire service comments are awaited.

Public comments have raised concerns that cars already get blocked in/out of the garage court, that cars park near the access and block visibility, the access road is curved preventing line of sight for vehicles entering and exiting and that cars reversing out of the garages would conflict with the driveway as there is a blind spot.

At the time of the case officer site visit there were no cars parked obstructing the access point or in front of the garages. From the site plan, it is considered that minimal boundary treatment where the garage court joins the driveway/bin store point, could provide clear visibility for users of the garages and the driveway to see each other, but this would make the bin store highly visible and the driveway open and insecure.

Parking The site will contain a double garage and 3 parking spaces. The garage meets the required 5.8 metre x 6.0 metre x 2.4 metres size and the parking spaces meet the required 3 metre x 5.5 metre size, as required by the Northamptonshire Parking Standards. The parking therefore meets the required 2 spaces plus a visitor space, required for a 3 bed dwelling. A cycle space is provided within the garage.

Overall, the proposal provides the required parking provision, and the highways authority raise no objection to the proposed access. Subject to the fire service confirming the fire hydrant is acceptable, the proposal meets the requirements of JCS policy 8 (b) (ii) and policy DM15 of the Northamptonshire Highway Development Management Strategy (December 2013).

Housing mix, national space standards, national accessibility standards Policy 30 (a) (ii) of the JCS seeks to ensure there would not be an overconcentration of a single type of housing where this would adversely affect the character or infrastructure of the area.

Planning Committee 122 of 131 3 February 2021

The JCS at Policy 30 (b) requires the internal floor area of new dwellings to meet the National Space Standards as a minimum.

Policy 30 (c) seeks new dwellings to meet category 2 of the National Accessibility Standards as a minimum.

The single dwelling would not result in an overconcentration of a single housing type in the area, or adversely affect the character or infrastructure of the area.

The dwelling will have 3 double bedrooms and will meet the minimum internal floor requirements of the National Space Standards. The application would comply with policy 30 (b) of the JCS. No detail has been provided about compliance with category 2 of the National Accessibility Standards as a minimum, despite the policy being noted to the applicant at pre-application stage.

Overall, the application does not demonstrate that the dwelling complies with JCS policy 30 (c).

Effect/impact on the living conditions of the neighbouring occupiers and the future occupiers of the development The JCS at policy 8 (e) (i) states that development should protect amenity by not resulting in an unacceptable impact upon the amenities of future occupiers, neighbouring properties or the wider area, by reason of noise, vibration, smell, light or other pollution, loss of light or overlooking.

At paragraph 127 of the revised NPPF the government requires new development to provide 'a high standard of amenity for all existing and future users'.

Neighbours to the site have raised concerns regarding noise disturbance, overlooking, overbearing, loss of light and light pollution.

The dwelling will be sited adjacent to number 16a Roche Way. The side of the proposed dwelling will be adjacent the side of 16a, but the new dwelling will be sited further forward in the plot than 16a. From the case officer site visit there are no first floor windows on the side of number 16a and no first floor side windows are proposed on the new dwelling facing 16a. The new dwelling is approximately 7 metres from 16a. Therefore, the windows on the front of number 16a would not be impacted by loss of light from the siting of the dwelling (the 45 degree line from the middle of the ground floor windows of 16a would not be broken by the two storey dwelling). The new dwelling would project 6 metres from the front of 16a (5 metres at ground floor level), and this could have some overbearing impact. There is an existing tall hedgerow on the boundary that would screen the new dwelling to some extent. Given the distance between the dwellings, the new dwelling would not have an unacceptable impact in relation to loss of light to the front of 16a. The rear of 16a is not as far west in the plot and so the rear windows will not overlook the rear garden of 16a. The glazed first floor bedroom and covered terrace would overlook the corner of the rear garden of 16a but this is considered to be a minimal impact.

The agent has provided a Solar Study (received 21/1/21) to demonstrate the impact of the new dwelling on the availability of daylight to 16a, when considering the current state of vegetation on both sites, the seasonal changes in direct sunlight, and the

Planning Committee 123 of 131 3 February 2021

ambient light relative to the time of day. The case officer agrees with the agent that the proposal will not have a detrimental impact on the availability of daylight to 16a.

The new dwelling will face the rear of Tulip Lodge and Tall Trees to the east. The distance between the new and existing dwellings will be approximately 34 metres and 29 metres respectively. This is an appropriate spacing and separation distance to minimise potential for overlooking. There are two first floor windows facing east, but the large window is to be heavily obscure glazed and the bathroom window is small and faces the parking/turning area only. Obscure glazing could be secured by condition.

The side elevation facing the garden of Tall Trees has glazing to a height of 3.9 metres, with solar shading louvres from a height of 2.5 metres. The windows serve a double height lounge and so would allow light spill from the large windows into the garden of Tall Trees. In addition, a kitchen window of 2.5 metres tall is proposed on this elevation also. Both windows are 2.4 metres from the boundary. The existing boundary is a hedge over 2 metres tall. Given the boundary treatment, the louvres, and the distance to the rear of the dwelling Tall Trees, the light spill will be limited and impact on the garden only and is considered to be acceptable.

The proposed garage is 5.8 metres tall and will have its rear gable end facing the garden of Tall trees. The garage will be approximately 19 metres from the Tall Trees dwelling. Tall Trees is orientated towards the boundary with the site and so the garage will be in view of Tall Trees. The garage height is excessive, but given the distance to the garage, and the fact it is to the north, it will not have an unacceptable impact in terms of loss of light. The side of the garage will face Tulip Lodge behind a new boundary fence and hedge. The garage pitched roof will be angled away from Tulip Lodge, so there will be no unacceptable amenity impact.

The rear of the dwelling will face 17 Redwell Road. The dwellings will be approximately 55 metres apart. The rear elevation will have 3.9 metre high ground floor windows (with louvres above measuring 2.5 metres) and a large glazed first floor bedroom window 7.3 metres tall at its highest point, leading to a first floor terrace. The windows will be over 5 metres from the rear site boundary. Given the distance to number 17, the impact from overlooking will be minimal and from light spill will be acceptable.

The access driveway will be to the rear of the residential dwelling 'Whytewell' and abut their rear garden. Concerns have been raised about the impact of cars and their lights upon the dwellings closest to the driveway. Boundary treatments to the driveway could be secured by condition to ensure no unacceptable light spill impact onto the adjacent gardens.

All rooflights to the library and bedroom are more than 3 metre above floor level and so would not enable any overlooking.

The access is between numbers 18 and 16 Roche Way. This is an existing access serving 6 garages, parking space and 2 dwellings, and the rear of number 18. The addition of vehicle movements from one more 3 bedroom dwelling will increase noise disturbance to those properties. However, the noise increase is small and intermittent and would not constitute an unacceptable impact.

Planning Committee 124 of 131 3 February 2021

The new dwelling would have adequate outdoor amenity space for the size of the dwelling. The remaining gardens of Whytewell and Tulip Lodge will be smaller, but would still be relatively large gardens.

In summary, subject to the suggested conditions, the scheme would not have an unacceptable impact on the amenities of future occupiers or neighbouring properties and accord with JCS policy 8 (e) (i).

Sustainability Policy 9 of the JCS is clear that development should incorporate measures to ensure high standards of resource and energy efficiency and reduction in carbon emissions. All residential development should incorporate measures to limit use to no more than 105 litres/person/day and external water use of no more than 5 litres/person/day or alternative national standard applying to areas of water stress.

To ensure compliance with this policy, a planning condition is recommended.

Effect on flood risk and drainage The JCS at policy 5 sets out a raft of sub policies aimed at preventing or reducing flood risk. Part (c) of the policy states that development should be designed to incorporate sustainable drainage systems.

The revised NPPF at chapter 14 sets out government views on how the planning system should take into account the risks caused by flooding. The planning practice guidance under the chapter titled 'flood risk and climate change' gives detailed advice on how planning can take account of the risks associated with flooding in the application process.

Public comments have raised concerns regarding drainage.

The site is within flood zone 1 and so at minimal risk of flooding. The proposal includes a soakaway, and final details can be secured by condition to comply with JCS policy 5 (c).

Effect on foul sewage JCS policy 6 requires new development to be supported by the timely delivery of infrastructure.

JCS Policy 10 (b) requires new development to minimise increases in the demand for additional/expanded water infrastructure. Whilst policy 10 (c) states that planning permission will only be granted if it can be demonstrated that there will be sufficient infrastructure capacity provided within an agreed timescale to support and meet all the requirements which arise from the proposed development.

The development proposes to connect to mains sewerage. This is acceptable and in accordance with the above policies.

Effect on noise To ensure quality of life and safer and healthier communities the JCS at policy 8 (e) (ii) states that new development should be prevented from contributing to or being adversely affected by unacceptable levels of noise.

Planning Committee 125 of 131 3 February 2021

Chapter 15 of the revised NPPF gives advice on how local planning authorities should prevent new development from being adversely affected by unacceptable levels of noise pollution. The NPPF further advises that decisions should aim to avoid noise from giving rise to significant adverse impacts on health and quality of life as a result of new development.

The PPG offers detailed advice on Noise which was updated on 24 December 2014.

Public comments have raised concern about noise from the construction of the dwelling.

The council's environmental protection officer has not identified noise emanating from the development once constructed as an area of concern.

It should be identified that the council's environmental protection service has powers to deal with any unacceptable noise the development may create as necessary under the provisions of the Environmental Protection Act 1990.

The council's environmental protection service has powers to deal with any unacceptable noise caused by building works as necessary under the provisions of the Environmental Protection Act 1990 and it has published a leaflet entitled 'considerate contractor advice note'.

Due to the small area available to access the site, and proximity of neighbours, a construction environmental management plan should be secured by condition, to ensure compliance with JCS policy 8 (e) (ii).

Effect on air quality To ensure quality of life and safer and healthier communities the JCS at policy 8 (e) (i) requires development not to have an unacceptable impact on amenities by reason of pollution, whilst 8 (e) (ii) goes further by stating that both new and existing development should be prevented from contributing to or being adversely affected by unacceptable levels of air pollution.

Chapter 15 of the revised NPPF offers broad advice on how local planning authorities should prevent both existing and new development from being adversely affected by unacceptable levels of air pollution.

The PPG at paragraph 001 of the air quality section dated 6 March 2014 states that 'It is important that the potential impact of new development on air quality is taken into account in planning where the national assessment indicates that relevant limits have been exceeded or are near the limit'. The guidance goes on to explain the implications for local authorities if national objectives are not met which this will include measures in pursuit of the objectives which could have implications for planning. The PPG at paragraph 009 demonstrates how considerations about air quality fit into the development management process.

The East Midlands region is looking to minimise the cumulative impact on local air quality that ongoing development has rather than looking at significance.

Planning Committee 126 of 131 3 February 2021

As the proposed development includes the provision for vehicle parking. A key theme of the revised NPPF is that developments should enable future occupiers to make "green" vehicle choices and paragraph 110 (e) "incorporate facilities for charging plug-in and other ultra-low emission vehicles". Policy 15 (c) of the JCS seeks for the design of development to give priority to sustainable means of transport including measures to contribute towards meeting the modal shift targets in the Northamptonshire Transportation Plan.

An informative should be added to any permission seeking any gas fired boilers to meet a minimum standard of 40 mgNOx/Kwh. In addition, a condition is required to secure electric vehicle charging points within the development. With the condition, the proposal would meet JCS policy 15 (c) and 8 (e) (i) and (ii) and paragraph 110 (e) the NPPF.

Effect on biodiversity Paragraph 40 of the Natural Environment and Rural Communities Act, under the heading of 'duty to conserve biodiversity' states "every public authority must, in exercising its functions, have regard, so far as is consistent with the proper exercise of those functions, to the purpose of conserving biodiversity."

The JCS at policy 4 - biodiversity and geodiversity, sets out policy requirements for the protection and where possible, a net gain in biodiversity.

The NPPF states that planning decisions should enhance the natural and local environment by minimising impacts on and providing net gains for biodiversity (paragraph 170 (d)).

The Trees and Landscape SPD provides guidance that a tree survey should be undertaken at pre-application stage and a full application should be supported by finalised plans for tree removal/planting and landscaping.

The proposal includes the removal of trees in the garden of Whytewell, to create the driveway access, and the development is within the garden of Tulip Lodge. The applicant was advised at pre-application stage to submit full landscaping details and a biodiversity enhancement scheme. No details have been submitted.

The proposal therefore provides insufficient information to determine the impact of the development on the biodiversity on the site, and does not demonstrate a net gain in biodiversity, contrary to JCS policy 4 and the NPPF.

Effect on the Upper Nene Valley Special Protection Area The Upper Nene Valley Gravel Pits Special Protection Area (SPA)/Ramsar site is legally protected by the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010 (the 'Habitats Regulations').

Policy 4 of the JCS on biodiversity and geodiversity states that developments likely to have an adverse effect either alone or in-combination on the Upper Nene Valley Gravel Pits Special Protection Area must satisfy the requirements of the Habitat Regulations and avoid or mitigate any impacts identified.

Planning Committee 127 of 131 3 February 2021

The Upper Nene Valley Gravel Pits Supplementary Planning Document (SPD) has been produced to help local planning authorities, developers and others ensure that development has no adverse effect on the SPA, in accordance with the legal requirements of the Habitats Regulations. The SPD has been developed with Natural England and the RSPB. A Mitigation Strategy adopted as an addendum to the SPA SPD provides further guidance for development within the 3km zone of the SPA and details a specific financial contribution for each new dwelling towards Strategic Access Management and Monitoring (SAMM) to avoid and mitigate impact.

Since these policies were adopted there has been a ruling made by the Court of Justice of the European Union (the CJEU) on the interpretation of the Habitats Directive in the case of People Over Wind and Sweetman vs Coillte Teoranta (ref: C 323/17). This requires development relying on mitigation in relation to the Habitats Regulations to no longer be considered at the screening stage, but taken forward and considered at the appropriate assessment stage to inform a decision as whether no adverse effect on site integrity can be ascertained.

A Habitat Regulations Assessment to identify the likely effects of the proposed development on the SPA has been undertaken. It is considered that a planning decision on the merits of the proposed development can not be taken as the applicant has not made an SPA mitigation payment of £296.55 per dwelling made under section 111 of the Local Government Act 1972) and the development does not meet the criteria set out in the SPA SPD for this approach to be taken.

Any contribution provided will be used for measures to reduce the impacts of the proposed development and allows a conclusion of no adverse effect on the integrity on the Upper Nene Valley Gravel Pits Special Protection Area and Ramsar Site.

Natural England recommends that provided the SPA mitigation contribution is paid there is unlikely to be a significant effect to the SPA and following this approach provides an efficient and proportionate means to demonstrate compliance with the Habitat Regulations.

The applicant has not made the payment above, and therefore does not comply with Policy 4 of the JCS or with the requirements of the SPA SPD.

Contamination The JCS at policy 6 says that local planning authorities will seek to maximise the delivery of development through the re-use of suitable previously developed land within the urban areas. Where development is intended on a site known or suspected of being contaminated a remediation strategy will be required to manage the contamination. The policy goes on to inform that planning permission will be granted where it can be established that the site can safely and viably be developed with no significant impact on either future users of the development or on ground surface and waters.

The revised NPPF at paragraphs 178 and 179 sets out policies on development involving contaminated land. The planning practice guidance also offers detailed government advice on this topic.

Planning Committee 128 of 131 3 February 2021

The site is not known to be contaminated. The Environmental Protection Team recommends a condition regarding unexpected contamination. With the condition, the proposal would meet JCS policy 6.

Crime and disorder Section 17 of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998 details the need for the council to do all that it reasonably can to prevent, crime and disorder in its area.

The JCS at policy 8 (e) (iv) sets out the policy requirement for new development to seek to design out crime and disorder and reduce the fear of crime.

The adopted designing out crime supplementary planning guidance gives detailed advice this issue.

The revised NPPF at paragraph 127 (f) state that decisions should aim to ensure that developments create safe, inclusive and accessible environments which promote health and wellbeing with a high standard of amenity for existing and future users and where crime and disorder, and the fear of crime, do not undermine quality of life or community cohesion and resilience.

No concerns about crime have been raised by the Police. No conditions are considered necessary.

The proposed development is considered to comply with policy 8 (e) (iv) of the JCS.

Other Matters

Bin storage The application proposes bin storage within the site adjacent to the garage court.

Public comments have raised concerns about a bin lorry using the parking court and concerns about bins being presented and collected from Roche Way. Wellingborough Norse have confirmed that bins would need to be presented on Roche Way and that the bin lorry would not enter the garage court.

Site Notice and neighbour letters A site notice was posted on 25/11/20. No neighbour letters were sent out due to coronavirus restrictions. The Council has complied with their duty to publicise the application as per The Town and Country Planning (Development Management Procedure) (England) Order 2015 (as amended).

Development is contrary to policy G1 of the Wellingborough Local Plan Policy G1 is no longer part of the Development Plan for Wellingborough.

Concern over future property numbering This is not a material consideration for the planning application. An informative would be added to any planning permission in relation to street naming and numbering.

CONCLUSION The design is not appropriate for the local area and the application includes insufficient information to demonstrate that the proposal complies with the category 2 of the

Planning Committee 129 of 131 3 February 2021

National Accessibility Standards or will achieve a net biodiversity gain. The proposal does not provide suitable mitigation for the impact of the development on the Upper Nene Valley Gravel Pits Special Protection Area (SPA). The proposal is therefore contrary to policies 4, 8 (d) (i) and (ii) and 30 (c) of the Development Plan, the Trees of Development Sites SPD and the Upper Nene Valley Gravel Pits SPA SPD and parts 9, 12 and 15 of the NPPF. It is recommended that the proposal be refused.

RECOMMENDATION Refuse for the following reasons.

REASONS

1. The design of the proposed dwelling and garage, in terms of scale, design and materials does not reflect the site's immediate and wider context and local character. The proposed development would be contrary to policy 8 (d) (i) and (ii) of the North Northamptonshire Joint Core Strategy.

2. The proposed development does not demonstrate that the dwelling will meet category 2 of the National Accessibility Standards as a minimum. The proposed development would be contrary to policy 30 (c) of the North Northamptonshire Joint Core Strategy.

3. The proposal provides insufficient information to determine the impact of the development on the biodiversity on the site, and does not demonstrate a net gain in biodiversity. The proposed development would be contrary to policy 4 of the of the North Northamptonshire Joint Core Strategy, the Trees of Development Sites SPD and advice contained within the National Planning Policy Framework in relation to biodiversity enhancements.

4. No appropriate mitigation measures have been put in place to ensure that the proposed additional unit being created within this varied development would have no significant effects on the Upper Nene Valley Gravel Pits Special Protection Area. The proposed development would be contrary to policy 4 of the North Northamptonshire Joint Core Strategy.

INFORMATIVE/S 1. The plans and documents relating to this decision are; Site Location Plan 1203-SAP-XX-XX-DR-A-10000-SO-03 (received 13/11/20) Proposed Site Plan 1203-SAP-XX-XX-DR-A-10101-SO-04 (received 13/11/20) Proposed Block Plan 1203-SAP-XX-XX-DR-A-10100-SO-04 (received 13/11/20) Proposed Basement Plan 1203-SAP-V1--1-DR-A-10109-SO-02 (received 13/11/20) Proposed Ground Floor Plan 1203-SAP-V1-GF-DR-A-10110-SO-04 (received 13/11/20) Proposed First Floor Plan 1203-SAP-V1-01-DR-A-10111-SO-04 (received 13/11/20) Proposed Roof Plan 1203-SAP-V1-RF-DR-A-10112-SO-03 (received 13/11/20) Proposed Elevations Sheet 1 1203-SAP-V1-XX-DR-A-30310-SO-04 (received 13/11/20) Proposed Elevations Sheet 2 1203-SAP-V1-XX-DR-A-30311-SO-04 (received 13/11/20) Proposed Garage Plans 1203-SAP-V2-XX-DR-A-10110-SO-02 (received 13/11/20)

Planning Committee 130 of 131 3 February 2021

Proposed Garage Elevations 1203-SAP-V2-XX-DR-A-30310-SO-02 (received 12/11/20) Design and Access Statement (received 10/11/20) Scroxton and Partners letter dated 7/1/21 (received 18/1/21) Proposed Site Section 1203-SAP-XX-XX-DR-A-20200-SO-01 (received 22/1/21) Existing Solar Study 1203-SAP-XX-XX-DR-A-90011-SO-01 (received 22/1/21) Existing Solar Study 1203-SAP-XX-XX-DR-A-90010-SO-01 (received 22/1/21) Proposed Solar Study 1203-SAP-XX-XX-DR-A-90101-SO-01 (received 22/1/21) Proposed Solar Study 1203-SAP-XX-XX-DR-A-90100-SO-01 (received 22/1/21) 2. In accordance with the provisions in the Town and Country Planning (Development Management Procedure) (England) Order 2015 and pursuant to paragraph 38 of the National Planning Policy Framework, where possible and feasible, either through discussions, negotiations or in the consideration and assessment of this application and the accompanying proposals, the council as the local planning authority endeavoured to work with the applicant/developer in a positive and proactive way to ensure that the proposed development is consistent with the relevant provisions in the framework. 3. Link to Policies for Refusals - http://www.nnjpu.org.uk/docs/Joint%20Core%20Strategy%202011- 2031%20High%20Res%20version%20for%20website.pdf

Planning Committee 131 of 131 3 February 2021

PLANNING COMMITTEE - 3 February 2021

The following applications dealt with under the terms of the Principal Planning Managers delegated powers.

WP/20/00571/FUL

Location 35 Millers Park, Wellingborough, Northamptonshire, NN8 2NQ Proposal Demolition of existing utility room new enlargement to include wc/oriel window to landing and new ground floor rear corner doors to existing extension Decision Application Permitted

WP/20/00575/FUL

Location 2 Knights Close, Bozeat, Wellingborough, Northamptonshire Proposal Conversion of garage to utility room/w.c including the removal of a garage door and infilling with store doors and brick infilling in the front elevation and the removal of a window and door in the rear elevation and replacement with bi-fold doors and first floor extension above Decision Application Permitted

WP/20/00605/PAJ

Location 1 - 3 Newton Close, Wellingborough, Northamptonshire, NN8 6UW Proposal Notification for prior approval for a proposed change of use of a building from single storey office use (Class B1a) to residential (11 no. 1 bedroom flats) (Class C3) and provide associated parking Decision Prior Approval/Notification Declined

WP/20/00658/FUL

Location 6 Lammas Close, Orlingbury, Kettering, Northamptonshire Proposal The conversion of an existing garage into a lounge including the infilling of a garage door with brick infilling and a dual pane window and a new window in the side elevation and the construction of a new attached garage Decision Application Permitted

WP/20/00671/FUL

Location 80 Main Road, Grendon, Northampton, Northamptonshire Proposal Proposed rear and side extension Decision Application Permitted

WP/20/00672/LBC

Location 80 Main Road, Grendon, Northampton, Northamptonshire Proposal Listed building consent for proposed rear and side extension Decision Application Permitted

WP/20/00674/FUL

Location 12 Wilby Road, Mears Ashby, Northampton, Northamptonshire Proposal Carport Decision Application Permitted

WP/20/00682/FUL

Location Land between 27 and 31 Gipsy Lane, Irchester, Northamptonshire Proposal Proposed 4 bedroom detached house - re-submission Decision Application Permitted

WP/20/00686/FUL

Location 38 Blackmile Lane, Grendon, Northampton, Northamptonshire Proposal First floor rear extension, detached single garage and a front porch extension Decision Application Permitted

WP/20/00687/FUL

Location 70 Main Road, Wilby, Wellingborough, Northamptonshire Proposal Proposed conversion of double garage into habitable room including the removal of two garage doors and infilling with brick and one window in the front elevation and the removal of a pedestrian door and replacement with French doors and a window in the rear elevation Decision Application Permitted

WP/20/00688/FUL

Location 1-5 Baron Avenue, Earls Barton, Northampton, Northamptonshire Proposal Change of Use from Class B8 (storage and distribution) to Class B2 (general industrial) with ancillary office and storage Decision Application Permitted

WP/20/00692/FUL

Location 26 Bradshaw Way, Irchester, Wellingborough, Northamptonshire Proposal Retrospective application for a replacement highway boundary fence that was rotten and had blew down in a storm. Replacement fence is like for like with no increase in height Decision Application Permitted

WP/20/00698/FUL

Location 113 - 117 Stanley Road and 103 Mill Road, Wellingborough, Northamptonshire, NN8 1EA Proposal Retrospective change of use of existing flats at 113 to 117 Stanley Road from C3a to C2, and incorporating existing shop unit (A1) as associated office accommodation. Re-submission Decision Application Permitted

WP/20/00709/TPO

Location 32 Hatton Park Road, Wellingborough, Northamptonshire, NN8 5AT Proposal T1 Thuja - Reduce in height by 3.0 metres. Crown lift to a height of 3.0 metres. Trim tightly all round. Works to enable access to boundary wall to remove small Elder and Laurel causing damage to wall. Works to maintain tree at suitable dimensions given proximity to wall Decision Application Permitted

WP/20/00713/FUL

Location 1 Millers Park, Wellingborough, Northamptonshire, NN8 2NG Proposal Two storey rear extension and single storey front extension Decision Application Refused

WP/20/00718/LBC

Location 20 Sheep Street, Wellingborough, Northamptonshire, NN8 1BL Proposal Listed Building Consent to replace 2 no. windows to rear elevation; minor internal alterations to include new ground floor disabled wc; 3 no. new second floor wcs; install 2 no. kitchenettes; replace wall mounted boilers; new light fittings; remove 1970's joinery to internal arched openings on ground floor; new door entry system; remove modern studwork internal wall; remove external air conditioning units Decision Application Permitted

WP/20/00719/PNX

Location 27 Ferrestone Road, Wellingborough, Northamptonshire, NN8 4EJ Proposal An application to determine if prior approval is required for a proposed larger home extension for a single storey rear extension Decision Prior Approval/Notification Granted

WP/20/00720/FUL

Location 93 Vicarage Farm Road, Wellingborough, Northamptonshire, NN8 5EU Proposal Conversion of existing detached single garage into additional accommodation to be used in conjunction with existing house. Including the removal of the existing garage door and infilling with new timber weather boarding and a window in the front elevation. The removal of an existing window and replacement with an enlarged window and the formation of a new external door opening and new external door in the side elevation Decision Application Permitted

WP/20/00722/LBC

Location 2 Harrowden Road, Orlingbury, Kettering, Northamptonshire Proposal Listed Building Consent to replace thatch with Norfolk reed in the same style as existing Decision Application Permitted

WP/20/00724/LBC

Location Railway Station, Midland Road, Wellingborough, Northamptonshire Proposal Listed Building Consent for the replacement of existing cast iron columns 1-6 and apex brackets to canopy on platform one Decision Application Permitted

WP/20/00734/FUL

Location 122 Abbey Road, Wellingborough, Northamptonshire, NN8 2JN Proposal Single storey front and rear extension. Demolition of single storey rear projection Decision Application Permitted

WP/20/00736/FUL

Location 13 Townley Way, Earls Barton, Northampton, Northamptonshire Proposal First floor side extension above existing garage and alterations to include insertion of roof windows, replacement doors, exterior cladding and canopy Decision Application Permitted

WP/20/00737/FUL

Location 64 Priory Road, Wollaston, Wellingborough, Northamptonshire Proposal New gated driveway access on the northern boundary of the property - the erection of two 2.1 metre high x 0.45 metre wide brick piers and 4.8 metre wide gates and a new personnel gate with two brick piers measuring 1.2 metres in height x 0.45 metres in width Decision Application Permitted

WP/20/00739/LDP

Location Wollaston School, 100 Irchester Road, Wollaston, Wellingborough Proposal Certificate of Lawfulness for Proposed Development comprising of new build classroom block of gross floor area of 177 square metres and ridge height 3.15 metres and hard surfacing Decision Application Permitted

WP/20/00743/TPO

Location 18 The Promenade, Wellingborough, Northamptonshire, NN8 5AL Proposal Magnolia referenced T2 - crown reduction by a maximum of 50%, crown lifting and thinning. Walnut tree referenced T3 - pollard to suitable growth point. Cherry tree referenced T4 - crown reduction by 30%, re- shaping to reduce the width of the tree, removal of a low lateral branch. Decision Application Permitted

WP/20/00745/FUL

Location 49 Fallowfield, Wellingborough, Northamptonshire, NN9 5YZ Proposal Demolition of existing conservatory and erection of single storey rear extension Decision Application Permitted

WP/20/00747/PAMB

Location Water Reservoir , Manor Farm, Hardwick Village, Hardwick Proposal Application to determine if prior approval is required for a proposed: Change of Use of Agricultural Buildings to Dwellinghouses (Class C3), and for building operations reasonably necessary for the conversion - agricultural building to a single dwellinghouse (Use Class C3) Decision Prior Approval/Notification Granted

WP/20/00748/FUL

Location 2 Vicarage Lane, Mears Ashby, Northampton, Northamptonshire Proposal Two storey side extension to existing dwelling Decision Application Permitted

WP/20/00749/FUL

Location 34 Finedon Station Road, Isham, Kettering, Northamptonshire Proposal Single storey front extension Decision Application Permitted

WP/20/00750/TCA

Location 9 Bakehouse Lane, Mears Ashby, Northampton, Northamptonshire Proposal T1 - apple - reduce back over extended growth extensions by 2m - 3m Decision Application Permitted

WP/20/00752/FUL

Location 62 The Drive, Wellingborough, Northamptonshire, NN8 2DF Proposal Part single storey, part double storey extension to side and rear of property Decision Application Refused

WP/20/00757/LBC

Location The Old Swan Public House, 8 The Square, Earls Barton, Northampton Proposal Listed Building Consent to replace 2 no. defective timber sliding sash windows and 1 no. defective timber casement window at ground floor level to match existing (Retrospective application) Decision Application Permitted

WP/20/00759/FUL

Location 3 Glenfield Drive, Great Doddington, Wellingborough, Northamptonshire Proposal Single storey rear extension and area of raised decking Decision Application Permitted

WP/20/00760/LDP

Location 15 Fairfield Road, Isham, Kettering, Northamptonshire Proposal Application for a Lawful Development Certificate for a proposed development - proposed single storey rear extension and demolition of an existing single storey shower and conservatory Decision Application Permitted

WP/20/00762/FUL

Location 6 Peartree Close, Bozeat, Wellingborough, Northamptonshire Proposal Removal of existing conservatory and construction of single storey rear extension, internal alterations and alterations to an existing garden room including a new door opening and the blocking of an existing window and doorway Decision Application Permitted

WP/20/00763/TCA

Location 74 High Street, Great Doddington, Wellingborough, Northamptonshire Proposal Wild plumb tree: 20% reduction due to excessive shading. (Currently 10- 12m in height). Beech tree: As above Decision Application Permitted

WP/20/00766/FUL

Location 64 Elizabeth Way, Earls Barton, Northampton, Northamptonshire Proposal Single storey rear extension Decision Application Permitted

WP/20/00767/FUL

Location 44 Brampton Close, Wellingborough, Northamptonshire, NN8 5XG Proposal Proposed single storey side extension to form new kitchen and dining room and demolition of an existing side conservatory Decision Application Permitted

WP/20/00770/FUL

Location 35 Grasmere Green, Wellingborough, Northamptonshire, NN8 3EJ Proposal Single storey front extension with rooflight over Decision Application Permitted

WP/20/00773/TPO

Location Land rear of 72 (off Kingfisher Close), Nest Lane, Wellingborough, Northamptonshire Proposal T001 & T002 both Pine Trees, one is now dead and the other is in poor condition both to be felled and new planting would be proposed to the site (Refer to attached proposed scheme for replacement planting) Decision Application Permitted

WP/20/00776/PAMB

Location Greenfield Lodge, Strixton Village, Strixton, Wellingborough Proposal Application to determine if prior approval is required for a proposed change of use of agricultural grain store building to dwellinghouse (Class C3) Decision Prior Approval/Notification Granted

WP/20/00778/LDP

Location 8 Piper Close, Wellingborough, Northamptonshire, NN8 4US Proposal Application for a Lawful Development Certificate for a proposed development - Single storey rear extension Decision Application Permitted

WP/20/00779/FUL

Location 15 Westminster Road, Wellingborough, Northamptonshire, NN8 5YR Proposal Removal of existing roof and raising by 1.65 metres and conversion into habitable accommodation the installation of two velux roof lights in the front and rear elevations and a new second storey window in the side elevation Decision Application Permitted

WP/20/00780/FUL

Location 8 Crabtree Close, Wellingborough, Northamptonshire, NN8 2PJ Proposal Single storey side extension and demolition of a single storey garage Decision Application Permitted

WP/20/00789/PNX

Location 40 Hinwick Road, Wollaston, Wellingborough, Northamptonshire Proposal An application to determine if prior approval is required for a proposed larger home extension for a single storey rear extension Decision Prior Approval/Notification Granted

WP/20/00790/STUN

Location Mill Road Bridge, Mill Road, Wellingborough, Northamptonshire Proposal Application for Prior Approval under Part 18a, Schedule 2 of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 2015 (as amended) for extensions to bridge parapet. Decision Agreed BCW

WP/20/00791/LDP

Location 16 Regent Street, Finedon, Wellingborough, Northamptonshire Proposal Certificate of Lawfulness for the Proposed Use of the Finedon Health Centre for any use falling within Use Class E Decision Application Permitted

WP/20/00809/LBC

Location The Old Swan Public House, 8 The Square, Earls Barton, Northampton. Proposal Listed Building Consent for the proposed re-thatching of the existing thatched pitched roof areas and the overhaul/repairs to existing slated pitched roof areas, to rear of existing public house Decision Application Permitted

WP/20/00820/TCA

Location 22 Sywell Village, Sywell, Northampton, Northamptonshire Proposal T1 - Yew Tree - To formatively prune and crown reduce by 1m and crown clean. T2- Holly - Growing in close proximity to the Yew. To reduce in height by approximately 1m to balance with Yew Decision Application Permitted

WP/20/00828/PNX

Location 42 Wollaston Road, Irchester, Wellingborough, Northamptonshire Proposal An application to determine if prior approval is required for a proposed larger home extension - single storey rear extension with flat roof and the demolition of an existing rear conservatory and detached brick shed Decision Prior Approval/Notification Not Required

WP/20/00829/AMD

Location 32 Hatton Park Road, Wellingborough, Northamptonshire, NN8 5AT Proposal Application for a non-material amendment following a grant of planning permission (WP/20/00582/FUL) - Roof light in the utility on view C; View A window to match view C window instead of full length window; full length window on view B to replace 4 paned window Decision Application Permitted

WP/20/00859/TCA

Location 39 Oxford Street, Wellingborough, Northamptonshire, NN8 4JG Proposal Tree T1 Betula pubescens - Downy Birch. Crown reduction by some 20% to respond to neighbours' concerns. Tree T2 Betula pendula - Silver Birch. Removal of overhanging branch to respond to neighbours' concerns and removal of two other branches to avoid interference with telephone cables Decision Application Permitted

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, Principal Planning Manager, Swanspool House, Doddington Road, Wellingborough.

BUILDING REGULATIONS FULL PLAN DECISIONS ISSUED 17 Dec 2020 To 24 Jan 2021

App No Location Description Decision Rec'd Date 2 Month Decision Date Within 2 Date months

FP/2020/3504 75A Easton Lane Extensions, loft Plans 10/11/2020 Yes 11/01/2021 Bozeat conversion and Rejected Wellingborough associated alterations. Northamptonshire NN29 7NN FP/2020/4328 20 Sheep Street Alterations to form Approved 22/12/2020 Yes 12/01/2021 Yes Wellingborough accessible WC ,3no Northamptonshire toilets and kitchenette NN8 1BL facility. Replacement of 2no windows to rear and internal alterations FP/2020/4329 Land Rear Of 130 2No new semi- Approve 23/12/2020 Yes 15/01/2021 Yes And 132 detached dwellings conditions Finedon Road NOTE FOR SW * 105lt BCW Wellingborough and M2 Northamptonshire

FP/2020/2118/ 46 Westfield Road Residential Withdrawn 13/10/2020 Yes 07/01/2021 A Wellingborough development of 31 Northamptonshire apartments plus NN8 3HD associated works

4

Page 1 of 1 Received appeals

Appeal Site Ref. No. Date Status Type of Received procedure

Scrap Yard WP/20/00606/LDE 21.01.2021 Appeal in Written 304 Station Road progress Representation Isham

Appeal Decision Site Visit made on 17 November 2020 by S Watson BA(Hons) MSc MRTPI

Decision by R C Kirby BA(Hons) DipTP MRTPI

an Inspector appointed by the Secretary of State Decision date: 21 December 2020

Appeal Ref: APP/H2835/W/20/3257257 Garages rear of 13-19 Union Street, Finedon NN9 5EX • The appeal is made under section 78 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 against a refusal to grant planning permission. • The appeal is made by Mr A Thakrar for Mathura Properties Limited against the decision of Wellingborough Borough Council. • The application Ref WP/20/00319/FUL, dated 1 June 2020, was refused by notice dated 29 July 2020. • The development proposed is Demolition of garage to create 2 new dwellings.

Decision

1. The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for demolition of garage to create 2 new dwellings at Garages rear of 13-19 Union Street, Finedon NN9 5EX in accordance with the terms of the application, Ref WP/20/00319/FUL, dated 1 June 2020, subject to the 9 conditions set out in the schedule below.

Appeal Procedure

2. The site visit was carried out by an Appeal Planning Officer whose recommendation is set out below and to which the Inspector has had regard before deciding the appeal.

Main Issues

3. The main issues in this case are:

• The effect of the proposal on the living conditions of neighbouring occupiers, with regard to privacy and amenity space;

• The quality of the living conditions provided for future occupiers of the appeal site by way of amenity space and outlook; and,

• Highway safety regarding parking provision and intervisibility with Union Street.

Reasons

4. The appeal site is a large square area that has become somewhat overgrown. Along the north-east boundary, opposite the site access, is a row of eight garages that I understand are currently used for storage. The site is set behind the gardens of properties on Union Street and Oxford Street, while the access to the site is situated between two houses on Union Street. The garages would be demolished as part of the scheme.

https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate Appeal Decision APP/H2835/W/20/3257257

Living Conditions of neighbouring occupiers

5. During my site visit I noted that Nos 13-19 Union Street had much smaller rear gardens than appeared to be typical for the rest of the street. However, the size of this more limited private amenity space is existing and would not be reduced by the proposed two dwellings. Moreover, as the proposed dwellings are bungalows, none of their windows would be above ground floor level. Accordingly, it would be unlikely that the proposal would result in a loss of privacy to nearby properties or their gardens.

6. As such I conclude that the proposed dwellings would protect the living conditions of neighbouring occupiers in accordance with North Northamptonshire Joint Core Strategy (JCS) Policy 8, which requires development to protect the amenities of neighbouring occupiers in order to ensure quality of life.

Living Conditions of future occupiers

7. Given the size of the new bungalows, and the number of proposed bedrooms, I find them to be suitable for a small family. Although JCS Policy 8 does not specify a minimum requirement for garden sizes for a family home, I would expect the gardens to be of a size to accommodate a typical family’s needs. Such needs could include an area for sitting out, hanging out washing, space for children to play and a storage building. In this case the gardens of both properties would be commensurate to the scale of the properties, and the likely needs of future occupiers would be accommodated.

8. While the proposed bungalows would, in some places, be close to the boundaries of their respective plots, I find sufficient distance would be maintained between windows serving habitable rooms and any nearby boundaries. As a result, the outlook from the proposed windows would be suitable and the rooms would be pleasant to use.

9. I therefore conclude that the living conditions the proposed bungalows would provide would be of a high standard, appropriate for future occupiers. As such, the proposal complies with JCS Policy 8 which seeks, amongst other things, for development to protect the amenities of future occupiers to ensure quality of life.

Highway Safety

10. The new dwellings would be served by the existing vehicular access which serves the 8 garages. Although visibility at the junction with Union Street is restricted by the siting of the dwelling at No 13, this situation currently exists and I have no evidence before me to demonstrate that the existing use of the access has resulted in harm to pedestrian or vehicle safety. Moreover, whilst the garages are not currently used to their full extent, for the parking of vehicles used on a daily basis, they could reasonably be used as such. Such a use would be likely to result in a higher level of daily vehicles movements to and from the site than that which would be associated with 2 dwellings proposed.

https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 2 Appeal Decision APP/H2835/W/20/3257257

11. The shared driveway does not currently have a dedicated pavement and is shared by both vehicles and pedestrians. No evidence has been provided to demonstrate that harm to pedestrian safety has occurred as a result of this use.

12. The proposal would be likely to generate fewer pedestrian and vehicle movements along the drive than that which could occur. There is good visibility along the drive and vehicles would be likely to be travelling at low speed. The proposed scheme would be unlikely to result in conflict between pedestrians and vehicles using it. Furthermore, pedestrians using Union Street will likely be aware of the vehicular access and adjust their behaviour accordingly.

13. Although the vehicular access does not accord with the Council’s standards for the width of private drives, the probability of a vehicle entering and exiting the site at the same time would be likely to be small. If this did occur a driver of a vehicle entering the drive from Union Street would be able to see clearly along it and if a vehicle was exiting, it is likely that the driver would wait in Union Street until the driveway was clear. Accordingly, there would be a low probability that vehicles would reverse into Union Street from the access.

14. The proposal includes 2 parking spaces for each dwelling, sufficient to meet the parking requirements for occupiers as set out in The Northamptonshire Parking Standards. However, the standards also require that new residential development for 2 bedroom properties provide 1 visitor parking space per dwelling. Although no visitor spaces are proposed within the site, I have no evidence before me that Union Street could not accommodate visitor parking associated with the new dwellings. Moreover, I have no evidence to suggest that parking in Union Street or nearby roads has reached saturation or that they could not accommodate any parking that would be displaced by the redevelopment of the garage site. Bicycle storage could be secured by an appropriately worded planning condition.

15. As such I conclude that the proposed development would not be harmful to highway safety. As a result, it would comply with Policy 8 of the JCS which requires that development makes safe and pleasant streets and spaces through, amongst other things, prioritising pedestrians and cyclists, and ensuring sites are served by satisfactory parking, manoeuvring and accesses. It would also comply with Paragraph 109 of the National Planning Policy Framework (the Framework) which requires development be refused only where an unacceptable impact to highway safety is severe.

Other Matters

16. The appeal site is within a dense residential area where garages and outbuildings are typical behind properties fronting the highway. While larger than these, the proposed bungalows would be set spaciously within the site and would protect the character and appearance of the area. It is noteworthy that the Council did not refuse the scheme on character and appearance grounds.

Conditions

17. The Council has suggested conditions it would wish to see imposed in the event that the appeal was allowed. I have considered the suggested conditions against the advice on conditions set out in the Framework and the Planning

https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 3 Appeal Decision APP/H2835/W/20/3257257

Practice Guidance. I have amended some of the suggested wording to reflect this advice.

18. I find that to ensure clarity, a condition is necessary requiring that the development is carried out in accordance with the approved plans. In the interests of the character and appearance of the area conditions are necessary controlling external materials, landscaping, refuse and recycling. In the interests of highway safety conditions are required in respect of access, turning and parking areas. To encourage sustainable modes of transport a condition requiring bicycle storage areas is necessary.

19. I note the Council’s concerns regarding potential contaminants on the site and I find that it is possible that some limited contamination may be present given the existing use. However, I find that contamination from the garages is not assured, given the small scale, and that any contamination would likely be very limited. As such, the Council’s suggested pre-commencement condition would be excessive in relation to the scheme. A condition requiring a risk assessment, and remediation works, to be made in the event that contamination is found on site is more reasonable and appropriate in this case.

20. In order to enhance biodiversity a condition requiring the installation of bat and bird boxes is necessary.

21. The highway authority has recommended a condition requiring the provision of visibility splays. Given the relationship of nearby development such a splay could not be achieved and is not therefore reasonable to attach, nor necessary, given the conclusion that I have reached in respect of highway safety.

22. I find the suggested conditions raised by Northamptonshire Police regarding the types of doors and windows to be installed, and regarding emergency access are not reasonable. However, for the purposes of security and the safety of future occupiers I find it necessary that conditions are attached requiring boundary fences are at least 1.8m high, and that lighting is provided along the entrance driveway.

23. I find it would not be necessary to attach conditions requiring the property to be built with improved accessibility, nor to limit water consumption in line with building regulations, as such matters are controlled by other legislation. Moreover, although the Council has suggested a condition requiring the bungalows to meet the Technical Housing Standards – Nationally Described Space Standards, I have not been provided with a development plan policy supporting these standards and in accordance with the PPG, such standards cannot therefore be imposed.

24. While the development is likely to result in noise and disturbance during construction, given the scale of the proposal this would be limited and short-lived. I therefore find that the condition limiting the hours of construction, and the submission and adherence to a construction management plan, to be unreasonable and unnecessary.

https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 4 Appeal Decision APP/H2835/W/20/3257257

Recommendation

25. For the reasons given above I recommend that the appeal should be allowed subject to the recommended conditions. S Watson

APPEAL PLANNING OFFICER

Inspector’s Decision

26. I have considered all the submitted evidence and the Appeal Planning Officer’s report and concur that the appeal should be allowed with the suggested conditions. R C Kirby

INSPECTOR

https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 5 Appeal Decision APP/H2835/W/20/3257257

Schedule – Conditions

1. The development hereby permitted shall begin not later than three years from the date of this decision.

2. The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans: Site Location Plan, and Proposed Plans and Elevations incl. Site Plan (Drawing No. A912-1).

3. No development above ground level shall take place until samples of the external materials to be used in the construction of the development have first been submitted to, and approved in writing by, the local planning authority. The development shall thereafter be carried out in accordance with the approved details.

4. No development shall take place above ground level until details showing a scheme for the storage of refuse and recyclable materials is first submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved scheme shall be implemented and made available for use before the development hereby permitted is occupied and that area shall be used for no other purpose thereafter.

5. Prior to the first occupation of the development hereby permitted, the vehicular access, manoeuvring area and parking spaces shall be surfaced in accordance with details first submitted to and approved, in writing, by the local planning authority. Any area within 5 metres of the public highway must be surfaced in a stable and durable material, and arrangements must be made to prevent surface water runoff on to the highway.

6. Neither dwelling hereby permitted shall be occupied until provisions for the parking of bicycles associated with each dwelling have been made available in accordance with details first submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Local Planning Authority. Thereafter, the cycle parking provision shall be kept free of obstruction and shall be available for the parking of cycles only.

7. The development shall not be occupied until details of new nesting opportunities for bird and bats has been submitted to, and approved in writing by, the local planning authority, and carried out in accordance with the approved scheme.

8. Prior to the first occupation of the development hereby permitted, the hard and soft landscaping scheme shall be carried out in accordance with details first submitted to and approved, in writing, by the local planning authority. This shall include planting plans at a minimum of 1:200 showing: existing and proposed plants and trees; their species; sizes and densities; and, any root protection areas. If within a period of five years from the date of the planting of any tree or shrub, they, or any replacement, are removed, become severely damaged or diseased, or should die, they shall be replaced in the next planting season with a suitable replacement of an equivalent size, species and quantity. Details shall also be provided showing lighting for the shared access; fences of at least 1.8m height surrounding the private gardens; any proposed and existing services above and below ground; and, existing and proposed land levels. Thereafter the hard and soft landscape works shall be maintained and retained in situ.

https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 6 Appeal Decision APP/H2835/W/20/3257257

9. Any contamination that is found during the course of construction of the approved development shall be reported immediately to the local planning authority. Development on the part of the site affected shall be suspended and a risk assessment carried out and submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. Where unacceptable risks are found remediation and verification schemes shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. These approved schemes shall be carried out before the development is resumed or continued.

https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 7

Appeal Decision Site Visit made on 8 December 2020 by S Watson BA(Hons) MSc MRTPI

Decision by R C Kirby BA(Hons) DipTP MRTPI

an Inspector appointed by the Secretary of State Decision date: 12 January 2021

Appeal Ref: APP/H2835/D/20/3259304 47 Parkins Close, Wellingborough, NN8 2BF • The appeal is made under section 78 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 against a refusal to grant planning permission. • The appeal is made by Mr Constantin against the decision of Wellingborough Borough Council. • The application Ref WP/20/00426/FUL, dated 17 July 2020, was refused by notice dated 4 September 2020. • The development proposed is described as a rear extension and roof dormas.

Decision

1. The appeal is dismissed.

Appeal Procedure

2. The site visit was carried out by an Appeal Planning Officer whose recommendation is set out below and to which the Inspector has had regard before deciding the appeal.

Main Issues

3. The Council considered that the rear single-storey extension caused no adverse impacts and on the basis of the evidence before me I have no reason to reach a contrary view.

4. As such, the main issues in this case are the effect of the proposed dormers on:

• The character and appearance of the host dwelling and surrounding area; and,

• The living conditions of neighbouring occupiers by way of privacy and outlook.

Reasons

Character and Appearance

5. The appeal site is part of a relatively modern residential development within a wider residential area. Although the buildings within Parkins Close are somewhat varied, they are predominantly of a very similar, simple style. The row which the appeal site is a part of did not have any dormer windows to the front or rear and the roof scape was uniform. The appeal site itself contains a semi-detached dwelling with a rear garden, the land level of which rises up significantly towards the rear of the site.

https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate Appeal Decision APP/H2835/D/20/3259304

6. The proposed dormers to the front and rear of the property, by way of their size and bulky form, would be significant additions disproportionate to the scale of the host property. Moreover, they would substantially cover both of the front and rear roof slopes significantly changing the appearance of the roof. The front dormer would be in a prominent position where it would be incongruous and intrusive within the street scene, especially when seen from an angle where the depth and bulk of the dormer would be most obvious. While the rear dormer would not be visible from the street scene, it would still visible from the rear of neighbouring properties, where it would also appear as a disproportionate addition to the host dwelling, and out of keeping with the character and appearance of the surrounding area.

7. While the appellant has referred to examples of dormers being present in the wider area, the appeal site is read within the context of Parkins Close which is discrete from the surrounding streets, and where dormers are not characteristic.

8. Therefore, I conclude that the proposed dormer windows would, by way of their size and form, be harmful to the character and appearance of the host dwelling and surrounding area. The proposal therefore conflicts with Policy 8 of the North Northamptonshire Joint Core Strategy (JCS) which requires, amongst other things, that a development should respond to a site’s immediate and wider context and local character. The proposal would also conflict with high-quality design requirements of Paragraph 127 of the National Planning Policy Framework (the Framework), and the guidance on dormers within the Residential Extensions: A Guide to Good Design supplementary planning guidance.

Living Conditions

9. At the rear of the host dwelling is a single first floor window, serving a bedroom. Due to the change in land levels between Parkins Close and Valley Road, this window is not much higher than the rear ground floor windows, of dwellings on Valley Road. As such, and given the tall fence and garden shed at the end of the appeal garden, I find it likely that there is very little existing overlooking from it to properties on Valley Road.

10. However, the proposed rear dormer would be set at a higher level than this bedroom window, and views from it would be likely to result in a loss of privacy to the rear gardens of nearby bungalows in Valley Road. This would be likely to result in a reduction in occupiers’ enjoyment of their gardens.

11. The new dormer windows would be unlikely to result in a material change to the levels of privacy the occupiers of No 45 Parkins Close currently experience because there is a level of overlooking that is present from existing first floor rear windows. The absence of harm in this regard does not diminish the harm identified above.

12. Moreover, I find that neither the front nor the rear dormers would be so large or so close to neighbouring properties, including No 45 Parkins Close and Nos 47 and 49 Valley Road, so as to be intrusive or cause an overbearing impact to the outlook from these properties.

13. In light of the above I conclude that the proposed rear dormer window would cause harm to the living conditions of the opposite neighbouring occupiers in

https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 2 Appeal Decision APP/H2835/D/20/3259304

Valley Road by way of a loss of privacy, in conflict with JCS Policy 8 which seeks to ensure that the amenities of neighbouring occupiers are protected from overlooking, amongst other issues.

Other Matters

14. I note that the appellant is concerned with the way in which the planning application process was carried out. However, this is not a matter for this appeal and should be taken up directly with the Council in the first instance.

15. While I am sure that the additional living accommodation would provide some benefits for the appellant by way of increased family space, this doesn’t outweigh the harm identified.

Recommendation

16. For the reasons given above I recommend that the appeal should be dismissed. S Watson

APPEAL PLANNING OFFICER

Inspector’s Decision

17. I have considered all the submitted evidence and the Appeal Planning Officer’s report and concur that the appeal should be dismissed. R C Kirby

INSPECTOR

https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 3