East Northamptonshire Council Cedar Drive THRAPSTON Northamptonshire NN14 4LZ

APPLICATIONS FOR DETERMINATION

DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE - 9 February 2011 INDEX OF APPLICATIONS FOR CONSIDERATION Application Location Recom. Page No.

6 o’clock Meeting

EN/10/02068/FUL Land To The Rear Of 10 And 12 To 14 Park Grant 2 Road Raunds Northamptonshire EN/10/02130/FUL Open Space Adjacent To 5 Walmer Close Grant 14 Rushden Northamptonshire NN10 0TE EN/10/01376/FUL Riding Stables Manor Yard Main Street Grant 23 Sudborough Kettering Northamptonshire NN14 3BX EN/10/01378/LBC Riding Stables Manor Yard Main Street Grant 36 Sudborough Kettering Northamptonshire NN14 3BX EN/10/01950/CND South Reach High Street Denford Kettering Grant 44 Northamptonshire NN14 4EQ

7:30.o’clock Meeting

EN/10/01277/REM Land Between Willow Lane And Fineshade Grant 47 Close Wood Road Kings Cliffe Northamptonshire EN/10/01500/FUL 63 Benefield Road Oundle Peterborough Grant 75 Northamptonshire PE8 4EU EN/10/01501/LBC 63 Benefield Road Oundle Peterborough Grant 90 Northamptonshire PE8 4EU EN/10/01551/FUL The Talbot Hotel 7 New Street Oundle Grant 96 Peterborough Northamptonshire PE8 4EA EN/10/01552/LBC The Talbot Hotel 7 New Street Oundle Grant 105 Peterborough Northamptonshire PE8 4EA

EN/08/01931/REM Riverside Hotel Station Road Oundle Grant 116 Peterborough Northamptonshire PE8 5LA

EN/10/02012/FUL Kenmore Grange Cranford Road Great Grant 128 Addington Kettering Northamptonshire NN14 4BH

Development Control Committee 1 of 132 Date printed 9 February 2011

6 o’clock Meeting

Committee Report Committee Date : 9 February 2011 Printed: 28 January 2011

Case Officer Samantha Hammonds EN/10/02068/FUL

Date received Date valid Overall Expiry Ward Parish 12 November 2010 24 November 2010 19 January 2011 Raunds Saxon Raunds

Applicant Spire Homes

Agent MsQuare Architects Ltd - Mr T Millican

Location Land To The Rear Of 10 And 12 To 14 Park Road Raunds Northamptonshire

Proposal Erection of ten new dwellings (six 2-bedroom and four 3-bedroom affordable homes) along with ten sheds, new associated access road and parking court

1 Summary of Recommendation 1.1 The application be GRANTED subject to conditions and the prior finalisation of a section 106 agreement to secure developer contributions and affordable housing.

2. The Proposal 2.1 The application proposes residential development of ten affordable dwellings (six 2-bed and four 3-bed) on land to the rear of 10, 12 and 14 Park Road and between 5 and 6 Ponds Close, Raunds.

2.2 The development would be entirely two storey, with one pair of semi-detached dwellings set at right angles to a terrace of three and a terrace of five.

2.3 Twelve parking spaces would be provided within a block paved central parking court and private gardens would be provided to the rear of each dwelling.

2.4 Heads of terms for a proposed section 106 agreement were also submitted by the applicant and these comprise: • 100% affordable housing (10 units), broken down to 8 rented and 2 shared ownership • £1846.00 financial contribution towards libraries (NCC) • £920.00 financial contribution towards fire and rescue services (NCC)

3. The Site and Surroundings

3.1 There are no buildings on the site currently and the land appears to function as garden land. The site is concealed from Ponds Close by a 1.8m wire mesh fence with substantial mixed planting behind. The site can currently be accessed, by arrangement, up a private driveway to the side of 12 Park Road, but this is a private access and is not the proposed access for the new dwellings.

3.2 The site is almost entirely surrounded by residential uses, with the exception of a factory building to the east of the site that is occupied by Phoenix Resource Centre, a company that specialises in the production and supply of children’s learning and play resources. There is also a run-down looking residential garaging court to the north east of the site on Ponds Close.

Development Control Committee 2 of 132 Date printed 9 February 2011

4 Policy Considerations 4.1 National Planning Policy Guidance PPS1– Sustainable Development PPS3 – Housing PPG13 – Transport PPS23 – Planning and Pollution Control PPG24 – Planning and Noise

4.2 East Midlands Regional Plan 4.2.1 On 10th November 2010 the High Court ruled that the Secretary of State's decision to revoke Regional Spatial Strategies was unlawful as it had been taken without primary legislation. A statement was then issued by the Government reiterating their intention to remove RSSs and that this should be treated as a material consideration. However following further legal action the Secretary of State has now agreed that until the further court case in mid January it is for a Local Planning Authority to decide how much weight to attach to the letters that the Government have issued about Regional Spatial Strategies. 4.2.2 Relevant Policies from the East Midlands Regional Plan Policy 1 - Regional Core Objectives Policy 2 - Promoting Better Design Policy 3 - Distribution of New Development Policy 13b - Housing Provision (Northamptonshire) Policy 14 - Regional Priorities for Affordable Housing Policy 15 - Regional Priorities for Affordable Housing in Rural Areas

4.3 North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy 2008 Policy 1 – Strengthening the Network of Settlements Policy 6 - Infrastructure Delivery and Developer Contributions Policy 7 – Delivering Housing Policy 9 - Distribution and Location of Development Policy 10 – Distribution of Housing Policy 13 – General Sustainable Development Principles Policy 14 – Energy Efficiency and Sustainable Construction Policy 15 – Sustainable Housing Provision

4.4 Northamptonshire Minerals and Waste Development Framework (MWDF) Core Strategy (adopted May 2010) Policy CS7 4.5 Raunds Area Plan Preferred Options (January 2007) 4.6 Raunds Masterplan Consultation Draft (6 December 2010) 4.7 Supplementary Planning Guidance: Planning Out Crime; Parking

5 Relevant Planning History 5.1 03/00818/OUT – Residential development – refused under delegated powers on 10 November 2003 for the following reasons: • Contrary to the interim housing policy “Managing the Release of Housing Land” which sought to prioritise development on brownfield land at a time when housing land supply and development rates were exceeding expectations. • Lack of noise assessment to ensure compatibility with nearby commercial/industrial uses.

6 Consultations and Representations 6.1 Neighbours: 6.1.1 Seven letters of objection from 3, 5, 7, 22, 31 Ponds Close and 12A, 16 Spencer Street, raising the following issues: • An earlier application has already been rejected. • The whole close is opposed to this development.

Development Control Committee 3 of 132 Date printed 9 February 2011

• Object to the principle of access from Ponds Close. Should go from Park Road. • Adverse impact from volume of traffic on Ponds Close, a relatively small close. Residents are already unhappy about vehicle movement on Ponds Close. There would be a 33% increase in traffic flow compared to the existing 31 houses on the close, not including visitors. • Not enough parking is allocated to the new houses (12 bays for 10 houses is not enough as many households have more than one car and there will be visitors). • There are already parking issues due to lack of driveways and off-road parking for existing residents. Cars often park on pavements. • There is already parking pressure on Ponds Close from the conservative club after 7pm on Tuesdays. • Tenants of flats use the parking allocated for household residents. • 4.5m of on-street parking will be lost where the access road is proposed. • Concerned for the safety of the occupiers of 31 Ponds Close. • Concerned about noise disturbance from the extra traffic and during construction. • Access is in an unsafe place on the bend in the road. • Unless the narrow access between the factory and 12 Park Road is closed, the works will add considerably to the hazards already caused by residents parked vehicles and customers cars waiting at the garage opposite (Tue-Sat). Park Road is a busy through route for pedestrians, cars and buses accessing housing and schools. Park Road becomes single lane for much of its length with very restricted views of approaching vehicles. • Balance between private owner occupied property and social housing on the rental and open market. • The existing social housing on the close has caused noise nuisance and anti-social behaviour issues (alcohol and drug related). These plans could bring the same issues. Concerned for the general respect and care of the close. • The proposal will remove our view of the church from our bedroom window and will infringe on the privacy of our bedroom windows (16 Spencer Street) • Would rather Raunds expanded outwards than squeeze new dwellings into an already cramped environment. This site is not within the development plan for Raunds, so development effort should be focussed elsewhere. • The developer contributions that are offered should not sway the council’s decision. • This is not a brownfield site, it is garden land, and before that it was a quarry. • Some of the trees have been there for many years and may be protected. • The green appearance of the site would be lost. • Using existing utilities on Ponds Close (electric) as we already have numerous power cuts 6.1.2 A letter was received from the adjacent factory unit making the following observations: • there is a section of our wall exposed to the garden and not the gable end of plot 3 (so this may be susceptible to ball kicking). • if the gap between plot 3 and our wall is only 1.6m and in that space there is a wall of 600mm it will be impossible to erect a ladder to reach our wall if it becomes necessary. This problem would obviously be the same if Spire Homes needed to work on the gable end of plot 3. 6.2 Raunds Town Council: No objection. 6.3 Anglian Water: The Raunds STW has available capacity for the proposed flows. Recommend conditions requiring the submission of foul and surface water strategies. 6.4 Northants Police Crime Prevention Design Advisor: no objection. Suggest inclusion of Secured by Design, external lighting, lockable gate at the front building line of plot 7, lockable rear gates, defensive planting and further submission of boundary treatment details via condition. 6.5 NCC Contributions: Seek £1846.00 for libraries and £920.00 for fire and rescue. No education contributions sought.

Development Control Committee 4 of 132 Date printed 9 February 2011

6.6 NCC Archaeology: Due to the possible presence of Saxon/Medieval features and Ironstone workings there is potential for remains of archaeological interest to survive on the application site. this is not an over-riding constraint on development. please attach a condition for an archaeological programme of works as per paragraph HE12.3 of PPS5. 6.7 NCC Policy: the applicant should demonstrate how the proposal meets policies CS7 and CS8 of the Northamptonshire Minerals and Waste Development Framework (MWDF) Core Strategy (adopted May 2010). 6.8 ENC Housing: Support this application. This scheme provides much needed accommodation, given that affordable housing provision in Raunds represents less than 12% of the town's housing. No affordable homes have been provided in Raunds since the financial year 2008/09. The Strategic Housing Market Assessment indicates that the need for affordable housing is in the medium size range so this scheme which provides 10 family houses helps to meet this requirement. 6.9 ENC Design Officer: No objection. The scheme falls short of the aspirational 14/20 Building for Life Assessment score, but the score is indicative only as additional evidence may support a higher score. 6.10 ENC Environmental Services (contamination): no objections, providing conditions are placed on the planning permission to agree the remedial scheme and validation requirements. 6.11 ENC Environmental Services (noise): A condition which specifies the measures suggested in section 7 of the amended noise report (submitted by email on 4 Jan 2011) should be applied to any permission granted. 6.12 A site notice was displayed. No other representations were received.

7 Evaluation 7.1 The main considerations in the determination of this proposal are the principle of development; housing density and mix; design and visual impact; impact on neighbouring properties; highway matters and other matters.

7.2 Principle of Development 7.2.1 The two reasons for refusing an earlier application for residential development on this site in 2003 have been overcome. Firstly the old interim policy "Managing the Release of Housing Land", which sought to prioritise development on brownfield land and phase new building at a time when housing land supply and development rates were exceeding expectations, is no longer in place. At the present time the development rate is no longer exceeding expectations and furthermore there is a clear and identified need for more medium sized affordable dwellings in Raunds. This 'in principle' reason for refusal has therefore fallen away. Secondly, a noise assessment has been submitted in support of the current application to address the concerns raised in the second refusal reason (noise details are discussed later in this report). Therefore, the previous refusal of planning permission does not itself rule out the principle of development, subject to other material planning considerations. 7.2.2 Although the site historically accommodated a quarry and railway line (late 1800s), it now comprises garden land which, following a recent amendment to PPS3, is no longer classified as previously developed land. However, notwithstanding the site's current designation as garden (greenfield) land, the local planning authority should still be mindful of other guidance within PPS3, including the need to focus new housing in suitable locations with access to local services and transport, the efficient use of land, and the characteristics of the area. The application site is situated centrally within the residential, built up area of Raunds, within walking distance of the town centre and all it's associated services and facilities. The fact that the site is not specifically identified in the adopted or emerging local planning policy framework does not rule out the possibility of windfall development on a site like this. Providing the scale and siting of the dwellings accord with the character of the surroundings, and that suitable access and parking can be achieved the principle of development on this site is acceptable.

Development Control Committee 5 of 132 Date printed 9 February 2011

7.3 Density 7.3.1 Following recent changes to PPS3, housing density is no longer limited by national policy. It now falls to local authorities to determine appropriate housing densities, whilst working within the general requirement of PPS3 to make the most efficient use of land. 7.3.2 The proposal for 10 dwellings on this 0.21 hectare site results in a density of 47 dwellings per hectare. This is a sensible density for this area as it is not an overly high density and would be consistent with the existing character of the area.

7.4 Housing mix 7.4.1 The proposal for six 2-bed and four 3-bed affordable dwellings would offer a good mix of medium sized family homes and is consistent with the identified need for Raunds. 7.4.2 The tenure, a mixture of eight rented and two shared ownership, would provide a reasonable tenure mix with which the Housing Strategy manager is satisfied. 7.4.3 Concerns have been raised by local residents regarding the possible over- concentration of social housing on Ponds Close, given that there is already a small block of affordable flats on the street from which anti-social behaviour issues allegedly emanate. These concerns are noted, but it should also be noted that the current scheme is for family houses not flats, and the application process for the occupation of these new homes would be such that only families with children would be eligible. The current proposal would therefore ensure that there would not be an over-concentration of one particular demographic, but rather the development would redress any current imbalance back in favour of family housing which would be a benefit to the area.

7.5 Design and Visual Impact 7.5.1 The layout of the proposed development takes account of the existing built form of this part of Ponds Close by following broadly the established building line of the neighbouring properties. 7.5.2 The surrounding area lacks a strongly defined architectural style, and rather it accommodates dwellings of a wide variety of character and design together with a broad palette of materials. The proposed dwellings would be simple, two storey, gable ended rows that would compliment the existing character of the street, whilst bringing in a more contemporary element with the fenestration detailing and front door canopies. The materials proposed would contrast with the original dwellings on Ponds Close, emphasising the difference in architectural style whilst complementing the more modern development in the area. The precise materials details can be controlled by a condition requiring samples to be submitted and approved. 7.5.3 The layout incorporates good sized private gardens to the rear of each dwelling and an open, landscaped parking area to the front, which would soften the overall visual impact of the development on Ponds Close. Although none of the trees on site are protected, the amenity value they provide is not discounted and a green appearance for the development would be maintained as far as possible by the retention of several of the existing trees and the planting of new trees in the landscaped areas. The welfare of the largest retained tree, to the front of plots 8-10, could be safeguarded by the use of "no-dig" construction solutions for the parking and hard standing areas, and this in turn could be ensured by condition. 7.5.4 There is no objection from the council's design officer. Overall then the design and visual impact of the development is acceptable.

7.6 Impact on neighbouring properties and residential amenity 7.6.1 The siting of the dwellings would not breach a line drawn at 45 degrees from the nearest habitable window of any of the proposed or existing neighbouring dwellings. There is a slightly stepped arrangement to the footprint of the buildings, but they are broadly in line with the existing building lines, to limit any overbearing or overshadowing effect on either the existing or proposed dwellings.

Development Control Committee 6 of 132 Date printed 9 February 2011

7.6.2 Two windows are proposed on the side gables of plots 1 and 10, fronting the boundary of nos.5 and 6 Ponds Close. However these are secondary windows serving a bedroom and a dining room so could be obscure glazed and fixed shut to protect the privacy of neighbouring occupiers. A condition is recommended to ensure this. 7.6.3 The opposing dining, bedroom and bathroom windows on the side of plots 7 and 8 would be off-set from each other so to prevent direct overlooking between neighbouring properties. Given that they would look out only onto a shared pathway up the side of the properties, privacy would not be affected and in fact a degree of surveillance of this footpath would be beneficial. It is not necessary to insist that these windows be obscure glazed. 7.6.4 The back to back distance between the proposed dwellings and the dwellings on Spencer Street and Park Road is at least 21 metres, which is more than sufficient to ensure that there would be no adverse impact on residential amenity or privacy. 7.6.5 The occupier of the neighbouring factory unit has raised concerns about the potential for disturbance from the occupiers of unit 3 who may play ball games against the rear wall of the factory. Given the small area of the factory wall that would be exposed to the rear garden area, such disturbance would be unlikely. At any rate it is not an unusual situation to have a party wall on the boundary and any issues arising from such a relationship would be a civil matter to be resolved between the two occupiers.

7.7 Noise 7.7.1 A noise assessment was submitted in support of the application and this was revised at the request of the council due to initial discrepancies in the information therein. The amended noise assessment (emailed on 4 January and date stamped as received on 5 January 2011) did not identify noise from the adjacent factory and this was confirmed during site visits by the planning officer and environmental protection officers who both observed that road noise was the dominant noise source at the site. The development has therefore been correctly assessed against PPG24. 7.7.2 Mitigation measures have been suggested within the noise report to ensure that the "good" standard within BS8233 is met and the councils environmental protection officer is content that this would be achievable by imposing the recommended planning condition.

7.8 Highway matters 7.8.1 The development would be accessed from Ponds Close from a shared vehicle access some 33 metres from the bend in the road. The highways authority has confirmed that the proposed access on Ponds Close is acceptable and would give a sufficient "stopping sight distance" to allow emerging drivers adequate visibility to identify oncoming vehicles either side of the proposed access point. A condition is recommended to ensure that the 2x2 metre pedestrian visibility splays are kept clear and unobstructed, along with the usual requirement for highway details such as surfacing and gradient. The private driveway to Park Road would be closed off so that no through route would be possible. 7.8.2 Concerns have been raised by neighbours about the volume of traffic that the development may generate and the implications for safety of existing properties. However, given that the highway authority has confirmed that the proposed access is safe and meets the required standard, it would be difficult to argue that safety would be compromised on Ponds Close. Park Road is a relatively busy route, but the traffic generated by an additional ten dwellings is not likely to have a significant impact on highway safety. 7.8.3 There have been some recent changes to PPG13 which aim to allow a more localised approach to parking standards. Whilst the central requirement to express maximum parking standards has been deleted, local authorities will still need to set parking standards for their own areas. The changes to PPG13 do not in themselves set new parking standards, but merely allow local standards to be more flexible in the future, whilst still supporting sustainable transport choice and modal shift.

Development Control Committee 7 of 132 Date printed 9 February 2011

7.8.4 It is intended that new local parking standards will be incorporated into the forthcoming Four Towns Plan, but in the meantime the only local standards we can apply to development proposals are those produced by Northamptonshire County Council. Historically the Parking SPG (2003) set out a maximum residential parking standard of 1.5 spaces per dwelling, so for the current development anything up to 15 spaces would be acceptable. 7.8.5 However the residential element of the Parking SPG has since been superseded by the Northamptonshire Place and Movement Guide (2008), which promotes more flexible standards informed by English Partnerships data about levels of actual car ownership for various property sizes and tenures and offers two different approaches to calculating these standards. Applying the first of these approaches which is based on an average, the current proposal (for 2 x 5-room shared ownership dwellings, 3 x 5- room rented dwellings and 5 x 4-room rented dwellings) would generate a total parking provision of 7.33 spaces, which seems very low given the rural nature of this district. The second approach is based on 1 allocated space per dwelling plus some additional space and suggests that the current proposal would generate a total parking provision of 11.46 spaces, which seems more sensible. 7.8.6 The application proposes 12 spaces for the development, which is in line with the outdated approach in the Parking SPG and in line with the second approach in the Northamptonshire Place and Movement Guide. Whilst local residents' comments regarding the existing parking situation on Ponds Close and Park Road are noted, in the absence of any newer, more localised standards, there seems to be no firm basis upon which to resist this proposal from a parking provision perspective. Despite the government's intention to allow more localised parking standards, the recently revised version of PPG13 does not automatically change our local policies, and furthermore PPG13 still states that "local authorities should not require developers to provide more parking spaces than they themselves wish, other than in exceptional circumstances". 7.8.7 Given that the current development is sustainably located, within walking distance of the centre of Raunds, and that it is for affordable housing where car ownership may not be as high as with market housing, this is a good example of where a lower parking provision would be acceptable.

7.9 Developer Contributions 7.9.1 The developer has agreed to enter into a section 106 agreement to ensure the provision of the following developer contributions: • On-site provision of 100% affordable housing in the form of eight rented dwellings and two shared ownership dwellings • Financial contribution to libraries of £1846.00 • Financial contribution to fire and rescue of £920.00 7.9.2 These contributions are in line with what has been sought by NCC in respect of libraries and fire and rescue. It is acknowledged that there is nothing in ENC's Developer Contributions SPD that allows ENC to insist on fire and rescue contributions. However, the applicant is aware of this fact and has nonetheless unilaterally offered to make the contribution that has been requested by the county council. Therefore in this instance the fire and rescue contribution has been included. 7.9.3 The proposed breakdown of affordable provision is acceptable to ENC's housing strategy manager. 7.9.4 No other contributions have been sought from the relevant bodies. The PCT has confirmed that it does not seek developer contributions for affordable housing schemes. The county council has made the following statement: "From an education perspective we wouldn't be requesting anything. Raunds is served by several primary schools all with adequate surplus places to be able to accommodate any pupils generated from this development. It is also served by Manor secondary school which has enough surplus places to accommodate pupils from this development." During a further discussion on this matter, the county council advised that there are currently

Development Control Committee 8 of 132 Date printed 9 February 2011

196 surplus primary places and 81 secondary places in Raunds, so there would be no justification for seeking contributions and this could not be defended if challenged. Furthermore, it should be noted that, as this is an affordable housing scheme, it is likely that the school aged children that would occupy these properties would already be in the area's education system. 7.9.5 Subject to the completion and signing of a section 106 agreement to secure the above contributions planning permission can be granted.

8 Other issues 8.1 Loss of a view to the church - A local resident has objected because they feel the proposal will remove their view of the church from their bedroom window. However, the loss of a private view is not a material consideration that can be given any weight by the planning system. 8.2 Access for maintenance of the adjacent factory wall - party wall issues are a civil matter outside the remit of the planning system. 8.3 Crime & Disorder – the Police have no objections to the development but have suggested conditions to require details of the treatment of all boundaries and enclosures within the site, lockable gates to prevent unauthorised access to the rear gardens and details of an external lighting scheme. These conditions are recommended, and hence give the opportunity to ensure the development could achieve Secured by Design standards. 8.4 Contamination - This site has lain vacant for many years and there is no recent history of industrial activity on it. However, during the late 1800s and early 1900s it was a thriving quarry with lime kilns nearby serviced by tramways across the site. The applicant has submitted an environmental study in support of the planning application which identifies the above. An intrusive investigation has been carried out which has found some low level residual contamination that will need remediating. A preliminary remedial strategy has been suggested in section 11 of the Geo-environmental Assessment produced by Merebrook Consulting. Their proposals seem reasonable and entail the placing of 300mm of cover materials in all garden areas to supplement the existing topsoil. This work will require third party validation in the form of source approval results for the soil to be submitted to the LPA, confirmation that soil has been placed to the agreed depth and as placed sampling of the soil to ensure quality remains good. It is considered that measures can be secured through the use of planning conditions to ensure the development can be safely delivered. 8.5 Refuse and cycle storage can be accommodated within the substantial private rear gardens of each plot. A suitable area has been identified at the front of the site that would act as a collection point on bin days. 8.6 Sustainable Construction – A condition is recommended in line with the approach that is usually taken on this matter.

9. Conclusion 9.1 In recommending this application for approval, the relevant planning guidance and policies were identified as PPS1, PPS3, PPG13, PPS23, PPG24; East Midlands Regional Plan policies 1, 2, 3, 13b, 14, 15; North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy 2008 policies 1, 6, 7, 9, 10, 13, 14, and 15. and Northamptonshire Minerals and Waste Development Framework Core Strategy policy CS7. Having regard to these, the representations received and any other material planning reasons, the main issues were identified as the principle of the development, density, housing mix, the impact on neighbouring amenities, the design and visual impact and highway matters. The application has been recommended for approval as: • The principle of the development is acceptable and is consistent with the development plan. • The proposal represents the best use of land in an existing settlement.

Development Control Committee 9 of 132 Date printed 9 February 2011

• The proposal would not have an unacceptable impact on the local highway. • The development would not harm the visual amenity or character of the area. • The proposal would not have a significant impact on the amenities of neighbouring occupiers The proposal would create a satisfactory living environment for future occupiers.

10 Recommendation 10.1 It is recommended that the application be GRANTED subject to conditions and the prior finalisation of a section 106 agreement.

11 Conditions/Reasons -

1. The development hereby permitted shall begin not later than three years from the date of this decision. Reason: Statutory requirement under provision of Section 51 of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004.

2. Prior to the commencement of development cross sectional details, to illustrate the proposed differences in levels between the approved buildings, their slab levels, gardens and any retaining structures compared with the existing land levels and building heights of neighbouring properties, shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The details shall take into account the laying of any additional topsoil which may be required and shall include spot levels of the site and adjacent highway. Development shall be completed in accordance with the approved details. Reason: In the interests of visual amenity.

3. No development shall take place until (1) samples of the materials to be used in the construction of the external surfaces of the building hereby permitted and (2) details of the windows and external doors to be installed have been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. Development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details. Reason: To achieve a satisfactory elevational appearance for the development.

4. No development shall take place until there has been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority a scheme of boundary treatment indicating the positions, design, materials and type of any fences, railings, walls and gates to be erected around and within the site. These details shall include a lockable gate to be situated flush with the front elevation of plot 7. The approved boundary treatment shall be completed before any of the dwellings are occupied and retained thereafter unless otherwise agreed in writing by the local planning authority. Reason: In the interest of visual and residential amenity.

5. No development shall take place until full details of both hard and soft landscape works have been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. These details shall include the proposed parking and hardstanding areas, shared private footpaths and refuse collection areas as well as the landscaped/planted areas. All hard and soft landscape works shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details. The works shall be carried out prior to the occupation of any part of the development or in accordance with a programme agreed in writing by the local planning authority. Reason: In the interest of visual amenity.

6. All planting, seeding or turfing comprised in the approved details of landscaping shall be carried out in the first planting seasons following the occupation of the buildings or the completion of the development, whichever is the sooner; and any trees or plants which within a period of 5 years from the completion of the development die, are removed or become seriously damaged or diseased shall be replaced in the next planting season with

Development Control Committee 10 of 132 Date printed 9 February 2011

others of similar size and species, unless the local planning authority gives written approval to any variation. Reason: In the interest of visual amenity.

7. An arboricultural method statement shall be submitted to and be approved in writing by the local planning authority prior to the commencement of the development. This statement shall be in accordance with BS5837:2005 and shall include, but not be limited to, details of phasing of the hard surface installation and methods to be used for the construction of the dwellings. The development shall thereafter be carried out in accordance with these details, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the local planning authority. Reason: To ensure the protection of trees on site and in the interest of visual amenity.

8. Notwithstanding the submitted details, a tree protection plan for the retained trees identified on the approved plans shall be submitted to and be approved in writing by the local planning authority prior to the commencement of development and shall be in accordance with BS5837:2005. The development shall thereafter be carried out in accordance with these details, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the local planning authority. Reason: To ensure the protection of trees on site and in the interest of visual amenity.

9. Full details of the no dig construction method for the vehicular access, hardstanding and parking area shall be submitted to and be approved in writing by the local planning authority prior to the commencement of development. The development shall thereafter be carried out in accordance with the details so approved, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the local planning authority. Reason: To ensure that vehicle movements in and out of the site do not cause excessive soil compaction and root damage, to ensure the protection of trees on site and in the interest of visual amenity.

10. An appraisal of remedial options and proposal of the preferred option to deal with land contamination and/or pollution of controlled waters affecting the site shall be submitted to and approved by the local planning authority. No works, other than investigative works, shall be carried out on the site prior to receipt and written approval of the preferred remedial option by the local planning authority. This must be conducted in accordance with DEFRA and the Environment Agency’s ‘Model procedures for the Management of Land Contamination, CLR11’. Reason: To ensure the proposed remediation plan is appropriate.

11. Remediation of the site shall be carried out in accordance with the approved remedial option. No deviation shall be made from this scheme without the express written agreement of the local planning authority. Reason: To ensure site remediation is carried out to the agreed protocol.

12. On completion of remediation, two copies of a closure report shall be submitted to the local planning authority. The report shall provide verification that the required works regarding contamination have been carried out in accordance with the approved Method Statement(s). Post remediation sampling and monitoring results shall be included in the closure report. Reason: To provide verification that the required remediation has been carried out to the required standards.

Development Control Committee 11 of 132 Date printed 9 February 2011

13. If, during development, contamination not previously considered is identified, then the local planning authority shall be notified immediately and no further work shall be carried out until a method statement detailing a scheme for dealing with the suspect contamination has been submitted to and agreed in writing with the local planning authority. Reason: To ensure all contamination within the site is dealt with.

14. No development shall take place until the applicant, or their agents or successors in title, has secured the implementation of a programme of archaeological work in accordance with a written scheme of investigation to be submitted and approved in writing by the local planning authority. Reason: To ensure that features of archaeological interest are properly examined and recorded, in accordance with PPS5 Policy HE12.

15. Prior to commencement of development, the alternative point of access from the site to Park Road shall be permanently closed off and shall remain closed thereafter. Reason: In the interest of highway safety.

16. Notwithstanding the submitted details, unobstructed pedestrian visibility splays of 2.0m x 2.0m shall be provided on both sides of the vehicular access. The areas of land between the required sight lines and the highway carriageway shall be cleared, levelled and retained at a height not exceeding 0.6 metres above the carriageway and driveway levels. Reason: In the interest of highway safety.

17. Before any work is commenced on the development the subject of this permission details of the provision for foul water and surface water drainage installations to serve the development hereby permitted shall have been submitted to an approved by the local planning authority, and the development shall thereafter be carried out in accordance with the approved details. Reason: To safeguard public health and to prevent the potential for flooding on the site and elsewhere.

18. Before any work is commenced on the development the subject of this permission, full details of the proposals for external lighting of the development shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. Development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details. Reason: In the interests of the amenity of the area and public safety.

19. Notwithstanding the submitted details and before commencement of development hereby permitted, a sustainable strategy shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority to demonstrate that the development would meet requirements of Policy 14 of the North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy and Policy CS7 of the Northamptonshire Minerals and Waste Development Framework Core Spatial Strategy. The development shall be implemented in accordance with the details so approved, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the local planning authority. Reason: To ensure that the development is sustainable in accordance with national government advice contained in PPS1, Policy 14 of the adopted North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy and Policy CS7 of the Northamptonshire Minerals and Waste Development Framework Core Spatial Strategy.

20. Before units 1 and 10 hereby permitted are first brought into occupation, the first floor side windows shall be fixed shut and fitted with obscured glazing to a minimum level of obscurity to conform to Pilkington Glass level 3 or equivalent, and this obscure glazing shall thereafter be retained permanently. Reason: To ensure adequate standards of privacy for neighbours and occupiers.

Development Control Committee 12 of 132 Date printed 9 February 2011

21. Prior to commencement of development precise details of the proposed mitigation for protecting the proposed development from road noise shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The development shall carried out in complete accordance with the approved details before the development is brought in to use and thereafter retained. Reason: In the interest of residential amenity.

22. The development hereby permitted shall be carried out strictly in accordance with the approved plans: drawings 018-PA-001; 018-PA-002; 018-PA-100; 018-PA-200; 018-PA- 300 received by the local planning authority on 11 November 2010; and drawing 018-PA- 400 received by the local planning authority on 24 November 2010. Reason: In order to clarify the terms of the planning permission and to ensure that the development is carried out as permitted.

Informatives

1. The drawings to which this decision relates are as follows: Drawings 018-PA-001; 018-PA-002; 018-PA-100; 018-PA-200; 018-PA-300 received by the local planning authority on 11 November 2010; Drawing 018-PA-400 received by the local planning authority on 24 November 2010.

2. No works within the existing public highway may commence without the express written permission of the Highway Authority. This planning permission does not give or infer such permission. The Highway Authority, will only give consent to commence works subject to the completion of an Agreement, under Section 184 of the Highways Act 1980.

3. The attention is drawn to the implementation of the New Road Traffic Management Act 2004, where a three month notice period to allocate road space (for works within the highway) is formally given prior to the commencement of works.

4. In recommending this application for approval, the relevant planning guidance and policies were identified as PPS1, PPS3, PPG13, PPS23, PPG24; East Midlands Regional Plan policies 1, 2, 3, 13b, 14, 15; North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy 2008 policies 1, 6, 7, 9, 10, 13, 14, and 15. and Northamptonshire Minerals and Waste Development Framework Core Strategy policy CS7. Having regard to these, the representations received and any other material planning reasons, the main issues were identified as the principle of the development, density, housing mix, the impact on neighbouring amenities, the design and visual impact and highway matters. The application has been recommended for approval as: • The principle of the development is acceptable and is consistent with the development plan. • The proposal represents the best use of land in an existing settlement. • The proposal would not have an unacceptable impact on the local highway. • The development would not harm the visual amenity or character of the area. • The proposal would not have a significant impact on the amenities of neighbouring occupiers The proposal would create a satisfactory living environment for future occupiers.

Development Control Committee 13 of 132 Date printed 9 February 2011

Committee Report Committee Date : 9 February 2011 Printed: 28 January 2011

Case Officer Carolyn Tait EN/10/02130/FUL

Date received Date valid Overall Expiry Ward Parish 26 November 2010 2 December 2010 27 January 2011 Rushden Bates Rushden

Applicant David Wilson Homes (South Midlands) - Miss S Feely

Location Open Space Adjacent To 5 Walmer Close Rushden Northamptonshire NN10 0TE

Proposal Erection of one detached dwelling

This application is brought before Development Control Committee at the request of the local Councillor.

1 Summary of Recommendation

1.1 That permission be GRANTED subject to conditions.

2. The Proposal

2.1 The application proposes a detached dwelling to be constructed from brick and tiles.

2.2 The proposed dwelling would measure approximately 9.5 metres in width by 11.5 metres in depth by 8.4 metres in height.

2.3 The proposal includes an attached garage, four bedrooms, an en-suite, a bathroom, a sitting room, an open plan kitchen/dining/family room and a utility room.

3 The Site and Surroundings

3.1 The application site is a vacant plot of land which in 2000 was granted permission to be used as residential curtilage. In 1987 planning permission was granted for 77 dwellings and this was annotated as an area of open space within the plans submitted. It is currently an area of open space with a few trees and a dog litter bin.

3.2 The site measures approximately 0.6 hectares and is situated to the north of No.5 Walmer Close. The site is bounded by existing residential development of similar character and style on Walmer Close to the south, Glamis Close to the east and Harborough Road to the west and by Newton Road Cemetery to the north. The western boundary is formed by a public footpath linking Walmer Close and Harborough Road.

4 Policy Considerations

4.1 National Planning Policy Guidance PPS1– Sustainable Development PPS3 – Housing PPG17 – Planning for Open Space, Sport and Recreation

Development Control Committee 14 of 132 Date printed 9 February 2011

4.2 East Midlands Regional Plan Policy 2 – Promoting Better Design Policy 3 – Distribution of New Development Policy 13b – Housing Provision (Northamptonshire)

On 10th November 2010 the High Court ruled that the Secretary of State's decision to revoke Regional Spatial Strategies was unlawful as it had been taken without primary legislation. A statement was then issued by the Government reiterating their intention to remove RSSs and that this should be treated as a material consideration. However following further legal action the Secretary of State has now agreed that until the further court case in mid January it is for a Local Planning Authority to decide how much weight to attach to the letters that the Government have issued about Regional Spatial Strategies.

4.3 North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy Policy 7 – Delivering Housing Policy 9 – Distribution and Location of Development Policy 10 – Distribution of Housing Policy 13 – General Sustainable Development Principles Policy 14 – Energy Efficiency and Sustainable Construction

4.4 East Northamptonshire District Local Plan Saved Policies RL3 – Recreational open space provision by developers EN20 – Protection of important open land

4.5 Other Documents Highway Authority Standing Advice for Planning Authorities Three Towns Plan, Preferred Options

5 Relevant Planning History

5.1 87/01316/FUL Residential development: Phase 5, 77 dwellings. PERMITTED

5.2 00/00463/FUL Change of use of public open space to residential curtilage. PERMITTED. This application related to the eastern most part of the site and there is no evidence to suggest that this permission was ever implemented.

5.3 10/00821/FUL Erection of two dwellings. WITHDRAWN. This application was withdrawn following comments received from the Local Highway Authority to state that the proposal would not be in accordance with the highway authority’s standards.

6 Consultations and Representations

6.1 Neighbours: Comments received from No.11 Glamis Close, No.4 and No.6 Walmer Close and can be summarised as: • Large mature trees with root areas extending well underneath the foundations. • Subsidence is already a problem locally. • The application form is incorrect/incomplete – Section 15 is incorrectly stated (there are trees on the adjacent land); the house plans do not show the required piled foundations; the aborologists report applies to the previous application for two dwellings; and there is no layout drawing showing the revised house position with the encompassing tree root area and the required protective fencing. • The proposed access is unsuitable for construction vehicles. • The small piece of land is a designated public open space, which was purposely made as such to complement the original planning application for this part of the estate built in 1989. It remains in use today as an amenity area by local residents.

Development Control Committee 15 of 132 Date printed 9 February 2011

• Damage to the health of the two large category A mature trees in the cemetery will occur both from excavation work, soil compaction from construction plant and branch trimming. • Birds gather in large numbers at seasonal times in the large mature trees with the crowns overhanging the public space. • In 1995 permission was granted for the resident at No.5 Walmer Close to erect a 3- bar fence at the top end and side of Walmer Close. The residents of no’s 5, 6, 7 and 8 were also given the strip of land fronting these four properties for their own use stating that after 12 years from 1995 there would be possessory title of same. In this time a hedge has matured and covers the entire fence. Surely this is now private property and can not be interfered with? • Who would be responsible for the daily maintenance and cleaning of the area of driveway to be used during construction. • Disturbance caused by construction vehicles. • Appearance of the area. • Reduced daylight and invasion of privacy. • Would spoil the area and upset the community. • The presence of deer.

6.2 Rushden Town Council: No objection. However, the Town Council wish to point out the comments made by Mr Tansley regarding the access to the site.

6.3 Northamptonshire County Council Archaeological Advisor: “The application site is not located in an archaeologically sensitive area. The proposals are unlikely to have a significant impact on important archaeological deposits. Therefore I have no objection to this application on archaeological grounds”.

6.4 Northamptonshire County Council Rights of Way Officer: No objection providing the public highway is stopped up. “There is a Public Right of Way, Footpath UK5, registered on the Definitive Map (2005) surrounding the proposed development. The Right of Way should be stopped up where the driveway crosses the footpath as this is adopted footway and should not be on the definitive map. A condition is recommended for details of works affecting the public footpath to be submitted to and agreed in writing by the local planning authority prior to the commencement of development. Informatives should also be added to any permission granted to ensure that the applicant is aware of the need to keep the highway authority’s Rights of Way team involved throughout the process.

6.5 Local Highway Authority: “No objection to this proposal on highway related issues”.

6.6 Housing Strategy Manager: No comments received.

6.7 Planning Policy Manager: No comments received.

6.8 Ramblers Association. No comments received.

6.9 The Wildlife Trust: No comments received.

6.10 Ancient Monuments Society: No comments received.

6.11 Environmental Protection Officer: No comments received.

6.12 Conservation Officer (TPO): No objection in principle to the application subject to the inclusion of a number of conditions.

Development Control Committee 16 of 132 Date printed 9 February 2011

6.13 Site Notice posted: 15 December 2010 on a post to the front of the site.

7 Evaluation

7.1 The following considerations are relevant to the determination of this application:

7.2 Principle of development

7.2.1 The site is located within the built up area of Rushden where residential development would be acceptable. The main issue which needs to be considered is the loss of open space. The estate was developed in the late 1980’s following the grant of planning permission in 1987. The site has been used as open space since the estate was developed. No condition was imposed requiring the retention of open space, only a landscaping condition was added to maintain the landscape that was permitted as part of the development. In 2000 permission was granted for the site to be used as residential curtilage (although this was never implemented).

7.2.2 Policy RL3 of the East Northamptonshire Local Plan requires development to provide public open space. Policy EN20 states that permission will not be granted for development which adversely affects land of particular significance to the form and character of a town. Policy 13 of the North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy states that development should not lead to the loss of a community facility.

7.2.3 Whilst the above policies do not generally support the development of open space each application is assessed on its individual merits. In this case, the plot of open space appears to be underused as an area for recreation. The grass at the time of a recent site visit was overgrown and there was evidence of dog fouling. The area of open space is also poorly overlooked and therefore the quality of surveillance makes it less desirable for children to play. There is an area of green space off of Oakpits Way approximately 115 metres south of the application site and therefore the estate and the proposed dwelling would retain good access to public open space.

7.2.4 As planning permission was previously granted for a change of use to residential curtilage it would be difficult to resist the loss of the open space.

7.3 Visual impact

7.3.1 The design of the proposed dwelling would not appear out of keeping with the character and appearance of the street scene or the surrounding area. It would incorporate features that are common within Walmer Close such as the inclusion of an attached garage, a bay window, matching fenestration and a pitched roof with a protruding gable to the front elevation. Whilst the design of the proposed dwelling does not imitate that of any of the immediate neighbouring properties, the street is characterised by a number of properties that differ slightly from one another but incorporate similar design features.

7.3.2 The proposed location of the dwelling would follow the plot pattern of the street scene, by remaining in line with neighbouring properties. Although the plot would be slightly larger than neighbouring properties, the footprint of the proposed dwelling would be of a similar size to those within the surrounding area and would include rear amenity space measuring approximately 10 metres x 12 metres and would be similar to that at No.9 Walmer Close which measures approximately 10 metres x 11 metres. Therefore the space within the site is used efficiently so that the proposal does not appear out of keeping with the character and appearance of the street scene.

Development Control Committee 17 of 132 Date printed 9 February 2011

7.3.3 Providing that appropriate materials, boundary screening and levels are used the proposal would not result in a detrimental visual impact on the character and appearance of the street scene. Conditions are recommended for these to ensure that a satisfactory elevational appearance is achieved. At the time of writing this report drawings had been requested from the applicant to show the street scene elevation to ensure that the proposed levels are acceptable. A condition can be added accordingly to any permission that may be granted.

7.3.4 There is green space located off of Oakpits Way and therefore the proposal would be in accordance with paragraph 16 of PPS3 which states that development should provide good access to green open space.

7.4 Neighbouring amenity

7.4.1 The nearest properties likely to be affected by the proposal are No.11 Glamis Close and No.5 Walmer Close. All other nearby properties would be located far enough away not to be impacted upon.

7.4.2 No.11 Glamis Close would be located approximately 21 metres away from the proposed dwelling. This distance would be sufficient to prevent any undue harm caused by overlooking, overshadowing, or overbearing impact. The back to back distance between the two properties would be approximately the same distance as other back to back distances between properties in Walmer Close and Glamis Close.

7.4.3 No.5 Walmer Close would be located approximately 7.5 metres away. There is a proposed landing window to the south elevation. This is not classed as a habitable room and as such would not lead to any adverse issues of overlooking. Add sentence in here about neighbouring window.

7.5 Impact on highway safety

7.5.1 The local highway authority has no objection to the proposal on highway related issues. Although the proposal would mean that the access would now serve five dwellings rather than four, it is provided as a multiple access and therefore no changes would be required in order to provide for an intensification of use.

7.6 Impact on trees

7.6.1 The Council’s Conservation Officer has commented that she has no objection to the proposal subject to the imposition of relevant conditions. She comments that the site contains a number of young, ornamental trees set mainly at the centre of the existing open space and does not consider that their loss, as proposed, would have a detrimental impact on the surrounding area. The large mature trees to the northern site boundary are more significant. 7.6.2 The applicants have proposed to use a pile and beam construction technique. However, the Conservation Officer has advised that the foundation method should be conditioned as the dwelling might be at a sufficient distance to not require a piled foundation if the root protection area for T5 is reduced by 20%. However, this needs investigating further and requires the submission of an arboricultural method statement. 7.6.3 Reference is made within the arboricultural details to a Tree Protection Plan, however, one does not appear to have been submitted with the application and therefore a condition is recommended for a Tree Protection Plan to be submitted prior to the commencement of development.

Development Control Committee 18 of 132 Date printed 9 February 2011

7.6.4 A no dig surface has been proposed for the main access to the site and it has been specified that this will be put in as part of the initial works. Whilst this is a sound approach, it needs to form part of a wider method statement for the construction of the site. Again this can be conditioned.

7.6.5 A landscaping condition is recommended as some of the submitted plans show possible locations for replanting.

8 Other issues

8.1 Comments have been received relating to birds and deer that have been seen on site. As a result the Wildlife Trust were consulted. No comments have been forthcoming and therefore it wuld be difficult to sustain a reason for refusal on these grounds. 8.2 Comments have been received regarding the fence and various plots of land being located within private property. This is a civil matter and is not a material planning consideration. 8.3 Crime and Disorder - this application does not raise any significant issues. 8.4 Access for Disabled - this building would not be subject to any public access and therefore does not raise any significant issues. 8.5 Neighbours comments have been received regarding construction traffic. As this proposal is only for a single dwelling and traffic will only be temporary whilst the development is carried out, this issue is not a material planning consideration.

9 Conclusion

In recommending this application for approval, the relevant planning guidance and policies were identified as PPS1, PPS3, PPG17 East Midlands Regional Plan policies 2, 3 and 13b, the North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy 2008 policies 7, 9, 10, 13 and 14, The East Northamptonshire District Local Plan policies RL3 and EN20, The Three Towns Plan and Highway Authority Standing Advice for Planning Authorities. Having regard to these, the representations received and any other material planning reasons, the main issues were identified as the principle of development, the visual impact, the impact on neighbouring amenity, the impact on highway safety and the impact on trees. The application has been recommended for approval as:

1. The principle of developing the site for a single dwelling is considered acceptable and complies with all relevant planning policy as it would not lead to the loss of important open space that is fundamental to the character and appearance of the surrounding area. 2. The siting and design of the building is acceptable and the development would not harm the visual amenity or character of the area. 3. The proposal would not have a significant impact on the amenities of neighbouring occupiers. 4. The proposal would not result in a detrimental impact to highway safety. 5. The proposed development would not result in any harm to trees on the neighbouring site subject to the imposition of relevant conditions.

10 Recommendation

10.1 That the application be GRANTED subject to the following conditions:

Development Control Committee 19 of 132 Date printed 9 February 2011

Conditions/Reasons -

1. The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of 3 years from the date of this permission. Reason: Statutory requirement under provision of Section 51 of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004.

2. Notwithstanding the submitted information and prior to the commencement of development, details of the proposed facing and roofing materials for the proposed building shall have been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority and the development shall thereafter be carried out in accordance with the approved details. Reason: To achieve a satisfactory elevational appearance for the development.

3. No development shall take place until a landscaping scheme has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority, development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved scheme. The scheme shall be carried out in the first planting and seeding seasons following the occupation of the building or the completion of the development, whichever is the sooner, and which shall be maintained for a period of 5 years; such maintenance to include the replacement in the current or nearest planting season whichever is the sooner or shrubs that may die are removed or become seriously damaged or diseased with others of similar size and species, unless the Local Planning Authority gives written consent to any variation. Reason: In the interests of amenity and to secure a satisfactory standard of development.

4. The parking area hereby approved shall be provided and permanently retained for the parking of vehicles of residents/occupiers of the approved dwelling, prior to occupation, shall not be used for any other purpose and retained in perpetuity. Reason: In the interests of highway safety.

5. Notwithstanding the submitted details, full details of the method of the treatment of the external boundaries of the site shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority, implemented prior to the occupation of the building hereby permitted and retained thereafter. Reason: To ensure that the boundaries of the site are properly treated so as to secure a satisfactory standard of development.

6. The development hereby permitted shall be carried out strictly in accordance with the approved plans received by the Local Planning Authority on 26 November 2010 and 2 December 2010, drawing numbers: WC/2010/100 B Site layout, WC/2010/102 Location plan, H408-5 Ground floor plan, H408-5 First floor plan and H408-5 Elevations, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the local planning authority. Reason: In order to clarify the terms of the planning permission and to ensure that the development is carried out as permitted.

7. Prior to the commencement of works affecting any existing public right of way, full details of any enhancement, improvement, diversion or closure shall be submitted to and gain the approval of the local planning authority. Reason: In order to protect the public Right of Way.

8. Notwithstanding the submitted details, a Tree Protection Plan for the neighbouring trees shall be submitted and approved in writing by the local planning authority prior to the commencement of development and shall be in accordance with BS5837:2005. The protective fencing shall remain in place throughout the duration of the site works and shall

Development Control Committee 20 of 132 Date printed 9 February 2011

not be breached unless otherwise agreed in writing by the local planning authority. The development shall thereafter be carried out in accordance with these details. Reason: To ensure the protection of trees on the neighbouring site.

9. Notwithstanding the submitted details, an Arboricultural Method Statement shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority prior to the commencement of development. This statement shall be in accordance with BS5837:2005 and shall include, but not be limited to, details of how the construction of the site shall be phased and how service shall be installed. The development shall thereafter be carried out in accordance with these details. Reason: To ensure the protection of trees on the neighbouring site.

10. Prior to the commencement of the development, details of the proposed construction method for the dwelling and associated foundation structure, shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The development shall thereafter be carried out in accordance with these details. Reason: To ensure that the construction of the dwelling does not have an adverse impact on the neighbouring trees.

Informatives

1. In approving this application, the relevant planning guidance and policies were identified as PPS1, PPS3, PPG17 East Midlands Regional Plan policies 2, 3 and 13b, the North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy 2008 policies 7, 9, 10, 13 and 14, The East Northamptonshire District Local Plan policies RL3 and EN20, The Three Towns Plan and Highway Authority Standing Advice for Planning Authorities. Having regard to these, the representations received and any other material planning reasons, the main issues were identified as the principle of development, the visual impact, the impact on neighbouring amenity, the impact on highway safety and the impact on trees. The application has been approved as: 1. The principle of developing the site for a single dwelling is considered acceptable and complies with all relevant planning policy as it would not lead to the loss of important open space that is fundamental to the character and appearance of the surrounding area. 2. The siting and design of the building is acceptable and the development would not harm the visual amenity or character of the area. 3. The proposal would not have a significant impact on the amenities of neighbouring occupiers. 4. The proposal would not result in a detrimental impact to highway safety. 5. The proposed development would not result in any harm to trees on the neighbouring site subject to the imposition of relevant conditions.

2. 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. • 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 Northamptonshire County Council under s131 HA1980.

Development Control Committee 21 of 132 Date printed 9 February 2011

• If as a result of the development the Right of Way needs to be closed by applying for a temporary Traffic Regulation Order and application form for such an order is available from Northamptonshire County Council website, a fee is payable for this service and a period of six weeks notice is required. Please follow the link below: www.northamptonshire.gov.uk/en/councilservices/transport/row/legal/pages/temptros.a spx. • Any new path furniture (e.g. gates preferred over stile) needs to be approved in advance with the Access Development Officer, standard examples can be provided. • No works affecting any existing public Right of Way may commence without the express written permission of the highway authority’s Rights of Way team. • The developer is reminded to apply to the relevant Authority for any stopping up diversion of a right of way under section 257 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 required to facilitate the development of space adjacent to 5 Walmer Close. The alternative route for such a diversion must be agreed with the highway authority’s Rights of Way team and be available for public use prior to the closure of any existing route. • Northamptonshire County Council Rights of Way team is available and preferably required for the involvement, guidance and consultation at all stages of the diversion orders as necessary.

Development Control Committee 22 of 132 Date printed 9 February 2011

Committee Delegated Report Committee Date : 9 February 2011 Printed: 28 January 2011

Case Officer Carolyn Tait EN/10/01376/FUL

Date received Date valid Overall Expiry Ward Parish 27 July 2010 31 August 2010 26 October 2010 Lyveden Sudborough

Applicant The Executors Of Mrs M Giffen Deceased

Agent Berrys - Mr P Johnson

Location Riding Stables Manor Yard Main Street Sudborough Kettering Northamptonshire NN14 3BX

Proposal Conversion of existing agricultural and equine buildings to 3 no. dwellings

This application is brought before Development Control Committee as it proposes three dwellings within a restricted infill village.

1 Summary of Recommendation

1.1 That permission be GRANTED subject to conditions.

2. The Proposal

2.1 The application proposes the conversion of the existing agricultural and equine buildings to three dwellings.

2.2 Plot one is for a conversion of an existing barn to a two storey dwelling at the north of the site. It would involve the addition of a single storey extension to the east to replace an existing modern stable block. The property would accommodate 3 bedrooms, two bathrooms, a dressing room, a dining/living room, a WC, a breakfast/family room, a utility room, a shower room and a downstairs bedroom/office. A minimum of two car parking spaces would be directly to the south of the plot. The building would be constructed from stone and slate. The front (south) elevation of this building would include the conversion of a large barn door opening into a large window with a front door incorporated within it. The window would have an oak frame and the existing timber lintels would be removed. To the rear (north) elevation three new window openings would be made and a new conservation style roof light would be inserted. The existing barn opening would provide a large oak framed window with a double door leading to the rear amenity space. The proposed new extension would have a glazed elevation facing the rear amenity space. The existing lean-to pole barn to the rear, which currently houses sheep would be demolished.

2.3 Plot two is for the conversion of an existing barn to a two storey dwelling at the north of the site. It is adjoining plot one and is located to the east of it. The property would accommodate a living room, two WCs, a dining room/study, a pantry, a kitchen/breakfast room, a family room, a utility room, four bedrooms, two shower rooms and a bathroom. This plot would also accommodate a detached garage/store for at least two cars, which would result from the conversion of an existing outbuilding, to the

Development Control Committee 23 of 132 Date printed 9 February 2011

north. The main dwelling would be constructed from stone and slate and the proposed garage would be constructed from brick and slate. The front (south) elevation of this building would include the conversion of a large barn door opening into a large window constructed from an oak frame. All openings to this elevation will remain in situ. The existing door would be replaced with an oak boarded door and the opening to the first floor level would be replaced with an oak boarded panel. To the rear (north) elevation new oak doors would be inserted in the existing opening and the eaves of the existing protruding gable element will be raised by approximately 1.8 metres to accommodate a second floor. This gable end would include a new door and window opening. A new conservation style roof light would be inserted and a new window would be inserted to serve the kitchen/breakfast room. All openings in the proposed garage/store would remain as existing but would include new painted doors and windows.

2.4 Plot three is for the conversion of the existing stable block to a single storey dwelling with detached double garage. It is located to the south east of the site. The property would accommodate four bedrooms, a living room, a breakfast/family room, a kitchen, a utility room, a WC, two shower rooms, a bathroom and a study. A new roof would be created from the stable block to a stable block south of the proposed dwelling to form a ‘link’ to the living room and would be constructed from lead roll. The remainder of that stable block would be demolished to create an amenity area for the proposed dwelling. The proposed building would be constructed from slate, pantile, timber, brick and stone. All openings in the south west elevation would remain unchanged but would involve the insertion of new glazing and joinery. To the north east elevation two new openings would be created. The first would be located in the centre of the building between two brick pillars and would have fixed glazing. The second would be located to the north western end of this elevation and would include the insertion of a new timber front door. The north west elevation would introduce a new timber infill panel, glazing either side and a new fixed timber panel in an existing opening. The south east elevation would include new fixed glazing and timber panels in the existing openings and the height of the boundary wall would be lowered.

3 The Site and Surroundings

3.1 The group of buildings which are the subject of this application are located at the western end of the village to the north of the Manor House. The site comprises of a group of traditional buildings, which were previously used as a riding school and for agricultural purposes. The site is currently vacant. There is evidence to suggest that it is still used for agricultural purposes, as sheep were present at a recent site visit.

3.2 The main barn at the centre of the site is a long, two storey stone built barn with a east- west orientation under a slate roof. This barn has various single storey northward projecting gables that currently house facilities that were used as part of the riding school, such as a tack room. This barn has a lean-to pole barn extension along its northern elevation toward the western side.

3.3 To the north of the main barn are two detached barns, one a small stable block and the other is currently used for housing sheep. Both of these buildings are brick built with slate and terracotta pantile roof coverings.

3.4 To the south of the main barn is a concrete yard area and a further large, twin barn, rotated at roughly 45 degrees in orientation to the stone barn with a northwest- southeast layout. This building comprises of two long barns next to one another and has a parallel ridge line creating and ‘M’ shaped roof section. The southwest elevation has a number of stable boxes and the other side appears to be used for agricultural purposes. The roof is mainly covered in pantiles, however, the southeast end is hipped

and covered in slate.

Development Control Committee 24 of 132 Date printed 9 February 2011

3.5 The buildings are grade II curtilage listed and within a conservation area. They once formed part of part of Manor Farm to the south, which is a grade II listed building but have since been sold. There are a number of residential properties and agricultural buildings surrounding the site. 4 Policy Considerations

4.1 National Planning Policy Guidance PPS1– Sustainable Development PPS3 - Housing PPS5 – Planning for the Historic Environment PPS7 – Sustainable Development in Rural Areas

4.2 East Midlands Regional Plan Policy 2 – Promoting Better Design Policy 3 – Distribution of New Development Policy 13b – Housing Provision (Northamptonshire) Policy 26 – Protecting and Enhancing the Region’s Natural and Cultural Heritage Policy 27 – Regional Priorities for the Historic Environment On 10th November 2010 the High Court ruled that the Secretary of State's decision to revoke Regional Spatial Strategies was unlawful as it had been taken without primary legislation. A statement was then issued by the Government reiterating their intention to remove RSSs and that this should be treated as a material consideration. However following further legal action the Secretary of State has now agreed that until the further court case in mid January it is for a Local Planning Authority to decide how much weight to attach to the letters that the Government have issued about Regional Spatial Strategies.

4.3 North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy Policy 1 – Strengthening the Network of Settlements Policy 7 – Delivering Housing Policy 9 – Distribution and Location of Development Policy 10 – Distribution of Housing Policy 13 – General Sustainable Development Principles Policy 14 – Energy Efficiency and Sustainable Construction

4.4 Supplementary Planning Guidance None relevant

4.5 Other Documents The Rural North Oundle and Thrapston Plan, Inspector’s Modifications, 8 July 2009. The Rural North Oundle and Thrapston Plan went through an examination process in 2008 and 2009. Following this examination on 8 July 2009 the Inspector found the document sound. However, as yet the Council has not adopted the Plan as a Development Plan Document as such the Council is still treating the document as emerging policy. Highway Authority Standing Advice for Planning Authorities, Working Draft, July 2008

5 Relevant Planning History 5.1 None relevant.

Development Control Committee 25 of 132 Date printed 9 February 2011

6 Consultations and Representations

6.1 Neighbours: Comments received from Manor Farmhouse and 27 Main Street and can be summarised as: • Would not like to see this application lead to further development of the adjacent land and buildings to the north in the future. This would have a negative impact on the character of the area and would be unsuitable in the context of the village as a whole. • Careful consideration should be given to the landscaping of the existing site to minimise the impact on neighbouring properties. • Careful consideration should be given to traffic and access disturbance. • The Planning Inspectorate and East Northamptonshire Council have set a precedent by allowing the reuse of an existing building within the conservation area in Sudborough. A barn was allowed in stages to be developed into a dwelling. There is no difference between this application and the current application other than scale.

6.2 Sudborough Parish Council: No objection.

6.3 Conservation Officer (TPO): No comments received.

6.4 Planning Policy: The principles of the proposed development should be considered against a range of national and local policies. In particular, the development plan for Sudborough, consisting of the adopted Core Spatial Strategy and the Rural North Oundle and Thrapston Plan, contains specific policies regarding the re-use and/or conversion of redundant rural buildings on the edge of villages for residential usage. The Core Spatial Strategy Policy 1 and the Rural North Oundle and Thrapston Plan Policy 1 both specifically refer to the re-use of buildings adjacent to village boundaries for housing. Given the location of the Manor Yard buildings in relation to Sudborough, it is considered that the proposals clearly comply, in principle with relevant Core Spatial Strategy and Rural North Oundle and Thrapston Plan policies. Subject to satisfactory compliance with detailed criteria in the Core Spatial Strategy Policy 13 and the Rural North Oundle and Thrapston Plan Policy 23, there are no objections in principle to the proposed development.

6.5 Senior Conservation Officer: “Plots one and two: This range comprises two threshing barns with multi-purpose barns attached to its east elevation which include stabling and tack room with hayloft over. There is a heated room attached at right-angles (later addition) which would have possibly formed grooms accommodation. Only minor alterations are being proposed at the external element of the building; roof-lights are being added but these are on the rear elevation. A storey is being added above the existing addition at right angles to the main range. Internally a floor is being inserted into the former threshing barns but a level of full height space is being retained in each. Plot three: This range comprises a stable block to the front which is most likely a later alteration to the building, and another structure behind. Together the two structures create a double-pile arrangement. Opposite is a structure which appears to be a cart hovel which was altered in recent years to form stabling. The external elevation is being retained as is with only a few minor changes. Conclusion: The scheme retains the significance of the buildings and therefore no objection to the application”.

6.6 Local Highway Authority: “To ensure that highway safety is maintained, this authority recommends to the planning authority that the highways standards and planning conditions set out in the NCC document ‘Highway Authority Standing Advice Applications that have an Effect on the Highway’ be applied to this planning application”.

6.7 Natural England: No objection subject to the inclusion of a condition for a working

Development Control Committee 26 of 132 Date printed 9 February 2011

design methods statement and timetable of works to mitigate any undue adverse effects to bats to be submitted to the Local Planning Authority prior to the commencement of development.

6.8 Northants Wildlife Trust: Perhaps the objectives of the ecological survey reports might be best achieved through the use of suitably, strong-worded planning condition(s) and / or the inclusion of appropriate causes in a S106 Agreement, if relevant. The Wildlife Trust is happy to defer to Natural England’s position on these subjects, and to recommend that they are consulted closely regarding this matter. The Wildlife Trust has no further comments, or any outstanding issues.

6.9 Northants Bat Group: Agree with the findings and the recommendations within the submitted report.

6.10 Site Notice posted: 14 September 2010 on the fence to the front of the site. 7 Evaluation

7.1 The following considerations are relevant to the determination of this application:

7.2 Principle of development

7.2.1 PPS3 sets the overall criteria to be used for identifying broad locations and specific sites for housing development taking into account the need to provide housing in rural areas and where possible encourage environmental benefits. The conversion of redundant agricultural buildings or stables, which are well located to the existing built form of the village is seen as a way of achieving these criteria. This policy goes onto state that development should be focussed on previously developed land, in particular derelict sites and buildings. As the proposal is to re-use a number of vacant buildings, it would comply with this policy. PPS3 also states that development should be located so that it offers a range of community facilities, good infrastructure and offer access to jobs. As the proposal is located adjacent to the village of Sudborough it would benefit from the same services as the rest of the village and as such would meet the criteria of PPS3.

7.2.2 PPS7 provides further advice on development in rural areas. This sets out a key principle that: “All development in rural areas should be well designed and inclusive, in keeping and scale with its location, and sensitive to the character of the countryside and local distinctiveness”. This will be addressed in section 7.3 of this report. PPS7 sets out an overall strategy to “strictly control new house building (including single dwellings) in the countryside, away from established settlements”. However, in this case the proposal consists of the re-use of existing buildings adjacent to the built up area of Sudborough and would not involve the construction of new buildings within the open countryside.

7.2.3 Policy 1 of the North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy states that “development adjoining village boundaries will only be justified where it involves the re-use of buildings”. The proposal would comply with this policy.

7.2.4 The Rural North Oundle and Thrapston Plan expands upon the North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy, providing the more detailed policy framework in respect of the majority of villages in East Northamptonshire, including Sudborough. Policy 1 identifies Sudborough as a category A Network village. This specifies that “development opportunities in all villages for housing, employment or community facilities include the re-use and conversion of buildings within and adjacent to villages”. As the proposal is to re-use and convert existing buildings for residential use, it would

comply with this policy. Policy 23 ‘Rural Buildings – General Approach’ sets out more

Development Control Committee 27 of 132 Date printed 9 February 2011

detailed development management criteria for the re-use of rural buildings. These are: that schemes should be limited to buildings that are substantially intact and that permitted development rights should be removed to prevent encroachment into the open countryside. A structural survey was carried out and concluded that the buildings were in generally good condition and would be suitable for conversion. They would not require a significant amount of rebuilding and would not require wholesale demolition. Some of the timber trusses, purlins and rafters would need to be strengthened and replaced where rotten and some new floors would be required. Overall the structural survey shows that the development of these buildings would be in accordance with Policy 23.

7.2.5 Overall, the proposed development would comply with the above policies.

7.3 Visual impact

7.3.1 The proposed development would be mainly concealed from the street scene due to its set back from the public highway and the adjacent buildings. The south east elevation of plot three would be visible. The only change to this elevation includes a new glazed and timber panelled door in the existing opening. Therefore the proposal would not result in a detrimental visual impact on the character and appearance of the street scene or the conservation area.

7.3.2 A number of alterations are proposed which are set out in section 2 of this report. The proposed changes would remain in keeping with the existing buildings. The biggest alteration would be the single storey extension to the west of plot one. This would sit on the approximate footprint of the existing modern timber stable boxes, but would be set away from the neighbouring boundary. It would include a glazed gable facing north. This element has taken into account the scale, design and proportions of the existing buildings. It would remain subservient to plot one and would not be visible from a public viewpoint and as such would not result in a detrimental visual impact.

7.3.3 All fenestration has been designed to remain in keeping with the appearance of the previous use of the buildings as barns and stables and utilises all existing openings where possible. The proposed roof lights are all conservation style and have been sensitively located within central roof valleys and rear elevations so that they do not detract from the agricultural appearance of the buildings.

7.3.4 The south elevation of plots one and two would remain unaltered other than the insertion of new fenestration to the existing openings. The materials and design would be appropriate and would not detract from the appearance of the main building.

7.3.5 The roof of the north facing gable to plot two would be raised, however, the ridge height would remain lower than that of the existing building and as such would remain subservient in accordance with the Residential Extensions and Alterations Design Guide.

7.3.6 Overall, the design, layout, scale and use of materials are considered acceptable and would not detract from the buildings original agricultural appearance and therefore the proposal would not result in a detrimental visual impact to the existing buildings.

7.4 Neighbouring amenity

Development Control Committee 28 of 132 Date printed 9 February 2011

7.4.1 The nearest properties likely to be affected by the proposal are Manor Farmhouse Newton Lane, Grange Farm House Main Street and Manor House Main Street. All other properties would be located far enough away not to be impacted upon to any significant extent.

7.4.2 Manor Farmhouse is located to the north east of the site. The proposed extension to the protruding gable to the rear of plot two would not adversely affect this neighbouring property as it would be located approximately 30 metres away. This distance is considered sufficient to prevent any undue levels of overshadowing or overbearing impact. All other alterations would cause no more harm that the existing set up by reason of overshadowing or overbearing impact. There would be no overlooking caused to this neighbouring property as the openings to the east elevation of the building are to remain as existing with the addition of a roof light to the proposed extension. This would serve a shower room and a such would cause no issues of overlooking as this is not considered to be a habitable room.

7.4.3 Grange Farm house is adjoined by a boundary wall to the west elevation of the application site. The proposal includes a single storey extension to the west of plot one. However, as this is single storey and measures approximately 4.5 metres in height it would be unlikely to cause any issues of overshadowing or overbearing impact to this neighbouring property. It would sit approximately 1.5 metres higher than the boundary wall which is to be increased by approximately 1 metre. The protruding gable to the north of the site adjoined to plot two will also increase the ridge height to approximately 6.5 metres and therefore have an increase of approximately 2 metres. This would be located approximately 37 metres away from the neighbouring property and as such would not result in any undue harm by reason of overshadowing or overbearing.

7.4.4 There is a window in the west elevation which would serve the third bedroom to plot one. However, this would not give rise to undue levels of overlooking as the views would be obscured by the proposed single storey extension.

7.4.5 Manor House is located approximately 17 metres away at the nearest point. This distance is considered sufficient to prevent any undue harm caused by issues of overshadowing, overlooking or overbearing impact. Also there are a number of outbuildings and a high wall located between the proposal and the neighbouring property which would screen any views. This wall currently screens the existing buildings.

7.4.6 The change of use to residential accommodation from a riding school would be unlikely to cause any more harm with regards to noise as noise is not often an issue associated with residential use.

7.5 Impact on the grade II curtilage listed buildings

7.5.1 The Council’s Senior Conservation Officer has no objection to the proposal. He states that only minor alterations are being proposed to plots one and two at the external element of the building; roof lights are being added but these are to the rear of the building. Internally a floor is being added into each of the plots, however, a level of full height space is being retained in each to ensure that the previous use as a barn can be observed. He goes on to say that plot three consists of what is likely to be a later addition stable block with another structure behind. Together these structures form a double-pile arrangement. Opposite is a structure which appears to be a cart hovel which was altered in recent years to a form of stabling. Plot three would retain much of the external elevation with only a few minor alterations, therefore retaining the stable characteristics, such as the stable door openings. Overall, the Council’s Senior

Conservation Officer states that the scheme retains the significance of the buildings

Development Control Committee 29 of 132 Date printed 9 February 2011

and therefore does not object to the proposal subject to conditions to protect the fabric, setting and character of the buildings.

7.5.2 PPS5 states that a condition should be added to any consent where development will lead to the loss of a material part of the significance of a heritage asset for local planning authorities to ensure that developers take advantage of the opportunity to advance our understanding of the past before the asset is irretrievably lost. As this is the only opportunity to do this it is important that: • Any investigation, including recording and sampling, is carried out to professional standards and to an appropriate level of detail proportionate to the asset’s likely significance, by an organisation or individual with appropriate exercise; • The resultant records, artefacts and samples are analysed and where necessary conserved; • The understanding gained is made publicly available and; • An archive is created, and deposited for future use. Therefore a condition is recommended to ensure that the above is carried out in accordance with policy HE12.3 of PPS5.

7.5.3 It goes on to state that the fabric of a listed building will always be an important part of it’s significance and that retention of as much of the historic fabric as possible is therefore a fundamental part of any good alteration or conversion, together with the appropriate use of materials and methods of repair. The proposal would comply with this policy as it is retaining as much of the fabric as possible. However, a condition is recommended for materials to be submitted prior to the commencement of development in order to ensure as much of the fabric of the listed building as possible is retained.

7.5.4 Paragraph 191 of policy HE12.6 of PPS5 states that where the proposal involves a change of use, particularly to a single or multiple residential units, local planning authorities may consider that the impact on the building and its setting of potential future permitted development, such as conservatories, garden sheds and other structures associated with residential use, make the change of use proposal unacceptable in principle. Conditions preventing or limiting such future permitted development may make the change of use proposal acceptable. Therefore a condition is recommended to ensure that permitted development rights are removed in order to protect the setting and character of the grade II curtilage listed buildings and ensure that their original use can still be observed.

7.5.5 PPS5 also states that buildings will often have an important established and historic relationship with the landscaping that exists or used to exist around them. Therefore a landscaping condition is recommended to ensure that too much of the character of the buildings is lost through the introduction of residential amenity space.

7.5.6 Policy 13 of the North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy states that development should conserve and enhance the historic landscape and designated built environmental assets and their settings. As the proposal is to retain as much of the character of the riding school as possible the proposal would comply with this policy.

7.6 Impact on the adjacent grade II listed buildings 7.6.1 The proposed alterations and extensions would not cause any harm to the character or setting of the adjacent listed buildings as the proposal would retain as much of the fabric of the original buildings as possible. Very few minor external alterations are to take place and conditions are recommended to ensure that the buildings do not transform too much from their original appearance, therefore minimising the affect on the setting and character of the adjacent listed buildings.

Development Control Committee 30 of 132 Date printed 9 February 2011

7.7 Impact on highway safety

7.7.1 Subject to appropriate conditions being added to any permission granted, there would be no harm to highway safety.

7.7.2 As the proposed access is to serve more than one dwelling, the following conditions are recommended, and details of which are required prior to the commencement of development in order to ensure that they do not affect the character or setting of the listed buildings, so that highway safety is maintained: • Access width to be a minimum of 4.5 metres for the first 10 metres from the highway boundary; • A hard bound surface for the first 5 metres; • The maximum gradient shall not exceed 1 in 15. • Pedestrian visibility splays of 2 metres by 2 metres shall be provided on either side of the access within the site; • A positive means of surface water drainage shall be provided; and • No gate or barrier shall be erected within 5.5 metres of the highway boundary and any such feature, if erected, shall be hung to open inwards only.

8 Other issues

8.1 Adequate private amenity space would be provided for each of the dwellings. 8.2 Crime and Disorder - this application does not raise any significant issues. 8.3 Access for Disabled - this building would not be subject to any public access and therefore does not raise any significant issues.

9 Conclusion

In recommending this application for approval, the relevant planning guidance and policies were identified as PPS1, PPS3, PPS5, PPS7, East Midlands Regional Plan policies 2, 3, 13b, 26 and 27, the North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy 2008 policies 1, 7, 9, 10, 13 and 14, the Rural North Oundle and Thrapston Plan and Highway Authority Standing Advice for Planning Authorities. Having regard to these, the representations received and any other material planning reasons, the main issues were identified as the principle of development, the visual impact, the impact on neighbouring amenity, the impact on the curtilage listed buildings, the impact on the adjacent listed building and the impact on highway safety. The application has been recommended for approval as:

1. The principle of developing the site for residential use is acceptable as it complies with the relevant planning policy. 2. The proposal would retain as much of the existing buildings as possible and as such would not result in a detrimental visual impact or a detrimental impact to the fabric, character or setting of the grade II curtilage listed buildings or adjacent grade II listed buildings. 3. The proposal would not have a significant impact on the amenities of neighbouring occupiers. 4. The proposal would not result in a detrimental impact to highway safety subject to the implementation of relevant conditions.

10 Recommendation

10.1 That the application be GRANTED subject to the following conditions:

Development Control Committee 31 of 132 Date printed 9 February 2011

11 Conditions/Reasons -

1. The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of 3 years from the date of this permission. Reason: Statutory requirement under provision of Section 51 of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004.

2. Notwithstanding the submitted information and prior to the commencement of development hereby permitted, details of the facing materials of the proposed building(s) shall have been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority and the development shall thereafter be carried out in accordance with the approved details. Reason: To achieve a satisfactory elevational appearance for the development.

3. Notwithstanding the submitted information and prior to the commencement of development hereby permitted, details of the roofing materials of the proposed building(s) shall have been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority and the development shall thereafter be carried out in accordance with the approved details. Reason: To achieve a satisfactory elevational appearance for the development.

4. Before any works commence, a schedule of proposed finishes shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. All new and replacement materials including paints and putties shall meet the agreed specifications unless otherwise agreed in writing by the local planning authority. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved schedule and thereafter retained as such. Reason: In the interests of preserving the historic character, fabric and appearance of the grade II listed buildings and their setting.

5. All joinery shall be in timber not metal or plastic (excluding roof lights) and thereafter retained in perpetuity. Reason: In the interests of preserving the historic character, fabric and appearance of the grade II listed buildings and their setting.

6. Notwithstanding the submitted information, prior to the commencement of the development hereby permitted, a detailed schedule of those windows, doors, doorframes and all other internal and external joinery to be repaired/replaced shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The schedule shall detail the proposed method of repairs where appropriate and sectional drawings at a scale of 1:20 for all new joinery. No items shall be replaced unless otherwise approved in the schedule. The development shall then be carried out in accordance with the approved details and thereafter retained in perpetuity. Reason: In the interests of preserving the historic character, fabric and appearance of the grade II listed buildings and their setting.

7. The garages hereby approved shall be permanently retained for the parking of vehicles of residents / occupiers of the approved scheme, and shall not be used for any other purpose. Reason: In the interests of highway safety.

8. No development shall take place within the area indicated within the red line until the applicant or their agents or successors in title has secured the implementation of a programme of archaeological work in accordance with a written scheme of investigation which has been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The recording should be carried out to professional standards and to an appropriate level of detail proportionate to the assets likely significance, by an organisation or individual with appropriate expertise, the resultant records, artefacts and samples should be analysed

and where necessary conserved, and the understanding gained should be made publicly

Development Control Committee 32 of 132 Date printed 9 February 2011

available and an archive created and deposited for future use. Reason: In the interests of preserving the historic character, fabric and appearance of the grade II listed buildings and their appearance.

9. All stonework shall be bedded and pointed using a pure hydraulic lime mortar mix (no cement), the exact composition of which shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Following this, a representative sample panel of no less than 1 metre squared of stonework shall be prepared on site for the inspection and approval of the Local Planning Authority. Reason: In order to maintain the character and appearance of the property as a building of acknowledged architectural or historic interest.

10. Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 2008 (or any order revoking and re-enacting that Order with or without modification), no extensions or other form of enlargement to the residential development hereby permitted, nor erection of porches, outbuildings, hardstandings, storage tanks, gates fences, walls or other means of enclosure, shall take place without the prior written approval of the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To prevent overdevelopment of the site.

11. No development shall take place until a landscaping scheme has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority, development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved scheme. The scheme shall be carried out in the first planting and seeding seasons following the occupation of the building or the completion of the development, whichever is the sooner, and which shall be maintained for a period of 5 years; such maintenance to include the replacement in the current or nearest planting season whichever is the sooner or shrubs that may die are removed or become seriously damaged or diseased with others of similar size and species, unless the Local Planning Authority gives written consent to any variation. Reason: In the interests of amenity and to secure a satisfactory standard of development.

12. Before development commences, a working design methods statement and timetable of works to mitigate any undue adverse effects to bats shall be submitted to and agreed with the local planning authority and shall be carried out as part of the development. Reason: To mitigate any undue adverse effects to bats.

13. Notwithstanding the submitted information and prior to the commencement of development hereby permitted, details to show the following shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority and the development shall thereafter be carried out in accordance with the approved details. The approved details shall be implemented prior to the first use or occupation of the development hereby permitted. 1. Pedestrian visibility splays of at least 2 metres x 2 metres shall be provided on each side of the vehicular access. These measurements are taken from and along the highway boundary. Any features within or affecting the resultant triangular areas shall not exceed 0.6 metres above access/footway level. 2. The vehicular access gradient from the highway boundary shall not exceed 1 in 15. 3. A positive means of drainage shall be installed to ensure that surface water from the vehicular access or private land does not discharge onto the highway. 4. The means of vehicular access hereby permitted shall be paved with a hard bound surface for a minimum of 5 metres from the highway boundary and retained as such. 5. No gates, barrier or means of enclosure shall be erected within 5.5 metres of the highway boundary. Any such feature erected beyond that distance should be hung to open inwards away from the highway.

6. The means of access shall be a minimum width of (or widened to) a minimum width of 4.5 metres for the first 10 metres from the highway boundary.

Development Control Committee 33 of 132 Date printed 9 February 2011

Reason: In the interests of highway safety.

14. The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with a submitted schedule of works, as agreed in writing by the local planning authority prior to the commencement of development. The development shall thereafter be carried out in accordance with the approved details. Reason: In the interests of preserving the historic character, fabric and appearance of the grade II listed buildings and their setting.

15. All rainwater goods shall be of cast iron or cast aluminium upon rise-and-fall brackets and painted in a colour to be agreed in writing by the local planning authority prior to commencement of development and thereafter retained and maintained in perpetuity. Reason: In the interests of preserving the historic character, fabric and appearance of the grade II listed buildings and their setting.

16. All works hereby approved shall be carried out in a manner that no unnecessary damage is caused to the fabric or decorative features of the building and any damage so caused shall be rectified in accordance with a scheme to be submitted and approved by the local planning authority prior to the completion of development. Reason: In the interests of preserving the historic character, fabric and appearance of the grade II listed buildings and their setting.

17. All new rooflights shall be of a conservation range (Velux or similar) and details of them including their size and position, shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority prior to the commencement of development. The rooflights shall be installed and thereafter retained in perpetuity in accordance with the approved details unless otherwise agreed in writing with the local planning authority. Reason: In the interests of preserving the historic character, fabric and appearance of the grade II listed buildings and their setting.

18. The development hereby permitted shall be carried out strictly in accordance with the approved plans received by the Local Planning Authority on 27 July 2010 and 31 August 2010, drawing numbers: 1 Site location plan, 507/05B Site layout, 507/B Ground floor plans plots 1 and 2, 507/11B First floor plans plots 1 and 2, 507/12B Elevations plots 1 and 2, 507/13A Floor plan plot 3, 507/15 Garage/store plot 2, 507/16 Cross-sections plots 1 – 3, MS-3349 (1 of2) Topographical survey, MS-3349 (2 of 2) Topographical survey, MS-3349B (1 of 2) Floor plan, MS-3349B (2 of 2) Elevations, MS-3349C (1 of 2) Floor plans, MS-3349C (2 of 2) Elevations, MS-3349D (1 of 3) Floor plans, MS-3349D (2 of 3) Roof plan, MS-3349D 3 of 3) Elevations, MS-3349E (1 of 2) Floor plans, MS-3349E (2 of 2) Floor plans, MS-3349F (1 of 2) Floor plans, MS-3349F (2 of 2) Elevations, MS-3349G (1 of 2) Floor plan and MS-3349G (2 of 2) Elevations, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the local planning authority. Reason: In order to clarify the terms of the planning permission and to ensure that the development is carried out as permitted.

Development Control Committee 34 of 132 Date printed 9 February 2011

Informatives

1. In approving this application, the relevant planning guidance and policies were identified as PPS1, PPS3, PPS5, PPS7, East Midlands Regional Plan policies 2, 3, 13b, 26 and 27, the North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy 2008 policies 1, 7, 9, 10, 13 and 14, the Rural North Oundle and Thrapston Plan and Highway Authority Standing Advice for Planning Authorities. Having regard to these, the representations received and any other material planning reasons, the main issues were identified as the principle of development, the visual impact, the impact on neighbouring amenity, the impact on the curtilage listed buildings, the impact on the adjacent listed building and the impact on highway safety. The application has been approved as:

1. The principle of developing the site for residential use is acceptable as it complies with the relevant planning policy. 2. The proposal would retain as much of the existing buildings as possible and as such would not result in a detrimental visual impact or a detrimental impact to the fabric, character or setting of the grade II curtilage listed buildings or adjacent grade II listed buildings. 3. The proposal would not have a significant impact on the amenities of neighbouring occupiers. 4. The proposal would not result in a detrimental impact to highway safety subject to the implementation of relevant conditions.

Development Control Committee 35 of 132 Date printed 9 February 2011

Committee Delegated Report Committee Date : 9 February 2011 Printed: 28 January 2011

Case Officer Carolyn Tait EN/10/01378/LBC

Date received Date valid Overall Expiry Ward Parish 29 July 2010 31 August 2010 26 October 2010 Lyveden Sudborough

Applicant The Executors Of Mrs M Giffen Deceased

Agent Berrys - Mr P Johnson

Location Riding Stables Manor Yard Main Street Sudborough Kettering Northamptonshire NN14 3BX

Proposal External and internal alterations and renovations to existing agricultural and equine buildings to create 3 no. dwellings to include new windows, doors and rooflights; removal of lean-to pole barn and modern timber/brick boxes; first floor extension to barn, erection of garage and lead-roofed extension; raising of boundary wall and ground floor extension to barn on existing footprint

This application is brought before Development Control Committee as it proposes three dwellings within a restricted infill village.

1 Summary of Recommendation

1.1 That consent be GRANTED subject to conditions.

2. The Proposal

2.1 The application proposes the conversion of the existing agricultural and equine buildings to three dwellings.

2.2 Plot one is for a conversion of an existing barn to a two storey dwelling at the north of the site. It would involve the addition of a single storey extension to the east to replace an existing modern stable block. The property would accommodate 3 bedrooms, two bathrooms, a dressing room, a dining/living room, a WC, a breakfast/family room, a utility room, a shower room and a downstairs bedroom/office. A minimum of two car parking spaces would be directly to the south of the plot. The building would be constructed from stone and slate. The front (south) elevation of this building would include the conversion of a large barn door opening into a large window with a front door incorporated within it. The window would have an oak frame and the existing timber lintels would be removed. To the rear (north) elevation three new window openings would be made and a new conservation style roof light would be inserted. The existing barn opening would provide a large oak framed window with a double door leading to the rear amenity space. The proposed new extension would have a glazed elevation facing the rear amenity space. The existing lean-to pole barn to the rear, which currently houses sheep would be demolished.

2.3 Plot two is for the conversion of an existing barn to a two storey dwelling at the north of

Development Control Committee 36 of 132 Date printed 9 February 2011

the site. It is adjoining plot one and is located to the east of it. The property would accommodate a living room, two WCs, a dining room/study, a pantry, a kitchen/breakfast room, a family room, a utility room, four bedrooms, two shower rooms and a bathroom. This plot would also accommodate a detached garage/store with a minimum of two spaces, which would result from the conversion of an existing outbuilding, to the north. The main dwelling would be constructed from stone and slate and the proposed garage would be constructed from brick and slate. The front (south) elevation of this building would include the conversion of a large barn door opening into a large window constructed from an oak frame. All openings to this elevation will remain in situ. The existing door would be replaced with an oak boarded door and the opening to the first floor level would be replaced with an oak boarded panel. To the rear (north) elevation new oak doors would be inserted in the existing opening and the eaves of the existing protruding gable element would be raised by approximately 1.8 metres to accommodate a second floor. This gable end would include a new door and window opening. A new conservation style roof light would be inserted and a new window would be inserted to serve the kitchen/breakfast room. All openings in the proposed garage/store would remain as existing but would include new painted doors and windows.

2.4 Plot three is for the conversion of the existing stable block to a single storey dwelling with detached double garage. It is located to the south east of the site. The property would accommodate four bedrooms, a living room, a breakfast/family room, a kitchen, a utility room, a WC, two shower rooms, a bathroom and a study. A new roof would be created from the stable block to a stable block south of the proposed dwelling to form a ‘link’ to the living room and would be constructed from lead roll. The remainder of that stable block would be demolished to create an amenity area for the proposed dwelling. The proposed building would be constructed from slate, pantile, timber, brick and stone. All openings in the south west elevation would remain unchanged but would involve the insertion of new glazing and joinery. To the north east elevation two new openings would be created. The first would be located in the centre of the building between two brick pillars and would have fixed glazing. The second would be located to the north western end of this elevation and would include the insertion of a new timber front door. The north west elevation would introduce a new timber infill panel, glazing either side and a new fixed timber panel in an existing opening. The south east elevation would include new fixed glazing and timber panels in the existing openings and the height of the boundary wall would be lowered.

3 The Site and Surroundings 3.1 The group of buildings which are the subject of this application are located at the western end of the village to the north of the Manor House. The site comprises of a group of traditional buildings, which were previously used as a riding school and for agricultural purposes. The site is currently vacant. There is evidence to suggest that it is still used for agricultural purposes, as sheep were present at a recent site visit.

3.2 The main barn at the centre of the site is a long, two storey stone built barn with a east- west orientation under a slate roof. This barn has various single storey northward projecting gables that currently house facilities that were used as part of the riding school, such as a tack room. This barn has a lean-to pole barn extension along its northern elevation toward the western side.

3.3 To the north of the main barn are two detached barns, one a small stable block and the other is currently used for housing sheep. Both of these buildings are brick built with slate and terracotta pantile roof coverings.

3.4 To the south of the main barn is a concrete yard area and a further large, twin barn,

Development Control Committee 37 of 132 Date printed 9 February 2011

rotated at roughly 45 degrees in orientation to the stone barn with a northwest- southeast layout. This building comprises of two long barns next to one another and has a parallel ridge line creating and ‘M’ shaped roof section. The southwest elevation has a number of stable boxes and the other side appears to be used for agricultural purposes. The roof is mainly covered in pantiles, however, the southeast end is hipped and covered in slate. 3.5 The buildings are grade II curtilage listed and within a conservation area. They once formed part of part of Manor Farm to the south, which is a grade II listed building but have since been sold. There are a number of residential properties and agricultural buildings surrounding the site.

4 Policy Considerations

4.1 National Planning Policy Guidance PPS5 – Planning for the Historic Environment

4.2 East Midlands Regional Plan Policy 26 – Protecting and Enhancing the Region’s Natural and Cultural Heritage Policy 27 – Regional Priorities for the Historic Environment On 10th November 2010 the High Court ruled that the Secretary of State's decision to revoke Regional Spatial Strategies was unlawful as it had been taken without primary legislation. A statement was then issued by the Government reiterating their intention to remove RSSs and that this should be treated as a material consideration. However following further legal action the Secretary of State has now agreed that until the further court case in mid January it is for a Local Planning Authority to decide how much weight to attach to the letters that the Government have issued about Regional Spatial Strategies.

4.3 North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy Policy 13 – General Sustainable Development Principles

4.4 Supplementary Planning Guidance None relevant

4.5 Other Documents Rural North Oundle and Thrapston Plan The Rural North Oundle and Thrapston Plan went through an examination process in 2008 and 2009. Following this examination on 8 July 2009 the Inspector found the document sound. However, as yet the Council has not adopted the Plan as a Development Plan Document as such the Council is still treating the document as emerging policy.

5 Relevant Planning History

5.1 None relevant.

6 Consultations and Representations

6.1 Neighbours: Comments received from Manor Farmhouse and 27 Main Street and can be summarised as: • Would not like to see this application lead to further development of the adjacent land and buildings to the north in the future. This would have a negative impact on the character of the area and would be unsuitable in the context of the village as a whole. • Careful consideration should be given to the landscaping of the existing site to minimise the impact on neighbouring properties.

• Careful consideration should be given to traffic and access disturbance.

Development Control Committee 38 of 132 Date printed 9 February 2011

• The Planning Inspectorate and East Northamptonshire Council have set a precedent by allowing the reuse of an existing building within the conservation area in Sudborough. A barn was allowed in stages to be developed into a dwelling. There is no difference between this application and the current application other than scale.

6.2 Sudborough Parish Council: No objection.

6.3 Senior Conservation Officer: “Plots one and two: This range comprises two threshing barns with multi-purpose barns attached to its east elevation which include stabling and tack room with hayloft over. There is a heated room attached at right-angles (later addition) which would have possibly formed grooms accommodation. Only minor alterations are being proposed at the external element of the building; roof-lights are being added but these are on the rear elevation. A storey is being added above the existing addition at right angles to the main range. Internally a floor is being inserted into the former threshing barns but a level of full height space is being retained in each. Plot three: This range comprises a stable block to the front which is most likely a later alteration to the building, and another structure behind. Together the two structures create a double-pile arrangement. Opposite is a structure which appears to be a cart hovel which was altered in recent years to form stabling. The external elevation is being retained as is with only a few minor changes. Conclusion: The scheme retains the significance of the buildings and therefore no objection to the application”.

6.4 Northamptonshire County Council Archaeological Advisor: Please attach a condition as per paragraph 12.3 of PPS5.

6.5 English Heritage: No comments to make.

6.6 The Society for the Protection of Ancient Buildings: “The society is opposed in principle to the domestic conversion of historic farm buildings, such as the Riding Stables, as this type of conversion generally causes the greatest loss of and damage to historic fabric. As well as the physical alterations to farm buildings, the paraphernalia which inevitably accompanies domestic use has a profound effect on the buildings’ character and significance. Cars, washing lines, television aerials and other general domestic clutter cannot, realistically, be avoided. We would always encourage that all other possibilities for conversion are considered to allow a low key use of historic farm buildings and hold that domestic conversion should occur only as a final resort. Until recently the Riding Stables were in use for equine purposes. We feel that the application does not provide the justification needed to demonstrate that an equine, agricultural or other low impact use cannot be found and that domestic conversion of the buildings is the only possible option”.

6.7 Site Notice posted: 14 September 2010 on the fence to the front of the site.

7 Evaluation

7.1 The sole consideration in the determination of this application is the impact on the grade II curtilage listed buildings:

7.2 Impact on the grade II curtilage listed buildings

7.2.1 The Council’s Senior Conservation Officer has no objection to the proposal. He states that only minor alterations are being proposed to the external of plots one and two; roof lights are being added but these are to the rear of the building. Internally a floor is being added into each of the plots, however, a level of full height space is being retained in each to ensure that the previous use as a barn can be observed. He goes on to say

that plot three consists of what is likely to be a later addition stable block with another

Development Control Committee 39 of 132 Date printed 9 February 2011

structure behind. Together these structures form a double-pile arrangement. Opposite is a structure which appears to be a cart hovel which was altered in recent years to a form of stabling. Plot three would retain much of the external elevation with only a few minor alterations, therefore retaining the stable characteristics, such as the stable door openings. Overall, the Council’s Senior Conservation Officer states that the scheme retains the significance of the buildings and therefore does not object to the proposal subject to conditions to protect the fabric, setting and character of the buildings. 7.2.2 PPS5 states that a condition should be added to any consent where development will lead to the loss of a material part of the significance of a heritage asset for local planning authorities to ensure that developers take advantage of the opportunity to advance our understanding of the past before the asset is irretrievably lost. As this is the only opportunity to do this it is important that: • Any investigation, including recording and sampling, is carried out to professional standards and to an appropriate level of detail proportionate to the asset’s likely significance, by an organisation or individual with appropriate exercise; • The resultant records, artefacts and samples are analysed and where necessary conserved; • The understanding gained is made publicly available and; • An archive is created, and deposited for future use. Therefore a condition is recommended to ensure that the above is carried out in accordance with policy HE12.3 of PPS5.

7.2.3 It goes on to state that the fabric of a listed building will always be an important part of it’s significance and that retention of as much of the historic fabric as possible is therefore a fundamental part of any good alteration or conversion, together with the appropriate use of materials and methods of repair. The proposal would comply with this policy as it is retaining as much of the fabric as possible. However, a condition is recommended for materials to be submitted prior to the commencement of development in order to ensure as much of the fabric of the listed building as possible is retained.

7.2.4 Paragraph 191 of policy HE12.6 of PPS5 states that where the proposal involves a change of use, particularly to a single or multiple residential units, local planning authorities may consider that the impact on the building and its setting of potential future permitted development, such as conservatories, garden sheds and other structures associated with residential use, make the change of use proposal unacceptable in principle. Conditions preventing or limiting such future permitted development may make the change of use proposal acceptable. Therefore a condition is recommended to ensure that permitted development rights are removed in order to protect the setting and character of the grade II curtilage listed buildings and ensure that their original use can still be observed.

7.2.5 PPS5 also states that buildings will often have an important established and historic relationship with the landscaping that exists or used to exist around them. Therefore a landscaping condition is recommended to ensure that too much of the character of the buildings is lost through the introduction of residential amenity space.

7.2.6 Policy 13 of the North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy states that development should conserve and enhance the historic landscape and designated built environmental assets and their settings. As the proposal is to retain as much of the character of the riding school as possible the proposal would comply with this policy.

Development Control Committee 40 of 132 Date printed 9 February 2011

8 Other issues

8.1 NA

9 Conclusion

In recommending this application for approval, the relevant planning guidance and policies were identified as PPS5, East Midlands Regional Plan policies 26 and 27 and the North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy 2008 policy 13. Having regard to these, the representations received and any other material planning reasons, the sole issue was identified as the impact on the curtilage listed buildings. The application has been recommended for approval as:

1. The proposal would retain as much of the existing buildings as possible and as such would not result in a detrimental visual impact or a detrimental impact to the fabric, character or setting of the grade II curtilage listed buildings.

10 Recommendation

10.1 That the application be GRANTED subject to the following conditions:

Conditions/Reasons -

1. The works hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of 3 years from the date of this permission. Reason: Statutory requirement under provision of Section 51 of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004.

2. Notwithstanding the submitted information and prior to the commencement of works hereby permitted, details of the facing materials of the proposed building(s) shall have been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority and the works shall thereafter be carried out in accordance with the approved details. Reason: To achieve a satisfactory elevational appearance for the development.

3. Notwithstanding the submitted information and prior to the commencement of works hereby permitted, details of the roofing materials of the proposed building(s) shall have been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority and the works shall thereafter be carried out in accordance with the approved details. Reason: To achieve a satisfactory elevational appearance for the development.

4. Before any works commence, a schedule of proposed finishes shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. All new and replacement materials including paints and putties shall meet the agreed specifications unless otherwise agreed in writing by the local planning authority. The works shall be carried out in accordance with the approved schedule and thereafter retained as such. Reason: In the interests of preserving the historic character, fabric and appearance of the grade II listed buildings and their setting.

5. All joinery shall be in timber not metal or plastic (excluding roof lights) and thereafter retained in perpetuity. Reason: In the interests of preserving the historic character, fabric and appearance of the grade II listed buildings and their setting.

6. Notwithstanding the submitted information, prior to the commencement of the works

Development Control Committee 41 of 132 Date printed 9 February 2011

hereby permitted, a detailed schedule of those windows, doors, doorframes and all other internal and external joinery to be repaired/replaced shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The schedule shall detail the proposed method of repairs where appropriate and sectional drawings at a scale of 1:20 for all new joinery. No items shall be replaced unless otherwise approved in the schedule. The works shall then be carried out in accordance with the approved details and thereafter retained in perpetuity. Reason: In the interests of preserving the historic character, fabric and appearance of the grade II listed buildings and their setting.

7. No works shall take place within the area indicated within the red line until the applicant or their agents or successors in title has secured the implementation of a programme of archaeological work in accordance with a written scheme of investigation which has been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The recording should be carried out to professional standards and to an appropriate level of detail proportionate to the assets likely significance, by an organisation or individual with appropriate expertise, the resultant records, artefacts and samples should be analysed and where necessary conserved, and the understanding gained should be made publicly available and an archive created and deposited for future use. Reason: In the interests of preserving the historic character, fabric and appearance of the grade II listed buildings and their appearance.

8. All stonework shall be bedded and pointed using a pure hydraulic lime mortar mix (no cement), the exact composition of which shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Following this, a representative sample panel of no less than 1 metre squared of stonework shall be prepared on site for the inspection and approval of the Local Planning Authority. Reason: In order to maintain the character and appearance of the property as a building of acknowledged architectural or historic interest.

9. The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with a submitted schedule of works, as agreed in writing by the local planning authority prior to the commencement of development. The development shall thereafter be carried out in accordance with the approved details. Reason: In the interests of preserving the historic character, fabric and appearance of the grade II listed buildings and their setting.

10. All rainwater goods shall be of cast iron or cast aluminium upon rise-and-fall brackets and painted in a colour to be agreed in writing by the local planning authority prior to commencement of development and thereafter retained and maintained in perpetuity. Reason: In the interests of preserving the historic character, fabric and appearance of the grade II listed buildings and their setting.

11. All works hereby approved shall be carried out in a manner that no unnecessary damage is caused to the fabric or decorative features of the building and any damage so caused shall be rectified in accordance with a scheme to be submitted and approved by the local planning authority prior to the completion of development. Reason: In the interests of preserving the historic character, fabric and appearance of the grade II listed buildings and their setting.

Development Control Committee 42 of 132 Date printed 9 February 2011

12. All new rooflights shall be of a conservation range (Velux or similar) and details of them including their size and position, shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority prior to the commencement of development. The rooflights shall be installed and thereafter retained in perpetuity in accordance with the approved details unless otherwise agreed in writing with the local planning authority. Reason: In the interests of preserving the historic character, fabric and appearance of the grade II listed buildings and their setting.

13. The development hereby permitted shall be carried out strictly in accordance with the approved plans received by the Local Planning Authority on 27 July 2010 and 31 August 2010, drawing numbers: 1 Site location plan, 507/05B Site layout, 507/B Ground floor plans plots 1 and 2, 507/11B First floor plans plots 1 and 2, 507/12B Elevations plots 1 and 2, 507/13A Floor plan plot 3, 507/15 Garage/store plot 2, 507/16 Cross-sections plots 1 – 3, MS-3349 (1 of2) Topographical survey, MS-3349 (2 of 2) Topographical survey, MS-3349B (1 of 2) Floor plan, MS-3349B (2 of 2) Elevations, MS-3349C (1 of 2) Floor plans, MS-3349C (2 of 2) Elevations, MS-3349D (1 of 3) Floor plans, MS-3349D (2 of 3) Roof plan, MS-3349D 3 of 3) Elevations, MS-3349E (1 of 2) Floor plans, MS-3349E (2 of 2) Floor plans, MS-3349F (1 of 2) Floor plans, MS-3349F (2 of 2) Elevations, MS-3349G (1 of 2) Floor plan and MS-3349G (2 of 2) Elevations, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the local planning authority. Reason: In order to clarify the terms of the planning permission and to ensure that the development is carried out as permitted.

Informatives

1. In approving this application, the relevant planning guidance and policies were identified as PPS5, East Midlands Regional Plan policies 26 and 27 and the North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy 2008 policy 13. Having regard to these, the representations received and any other material planning reasons, the sole issue was identified as the impact on the curtilage listed buildings. The application has been approved as: 1. The proposal would retain as much of the existing buildings as possible and as such would not result in a detrimental visual impact or a detrimental impact to the fabric, character or setting of the grade II curtilage listed buildings.

Development Control Committee 43 of 132 Date printed 9 February 2011

Committee Report Committee Date : 9 February 2011 Printed: 28 January 2011

Case Officer Mr Rhys Bradshaw EN/10/01950/CND

Date received Date valid Overall Expiry Ward Parish 20 October 2010 22 October 2010 14 January 2011 Thrapston Market Denford

Applicant Mr And Mrs Bright

Agent Partners In Planning Ltd - Mr A Bussetil

Location South Reach High Street Denford Kettering Northamptonshire NN14 4EQ

Proposal Erection of a dwelling and garage following demolition of existing garages and alterations to access Condition 1 - Materails Condition 2 - Landscaping Condition 3 - Trees Condition 5 - Foul and Surface Water Condition 8 - Access Condition 9 - Access Drainage

This application is reported to the Development Control Committee because of the sensitive nature of the site. The Committee approved the original application at its meeting on 21.07.10.

1. Summary of Recommendation That the proposed reduction in height to the boundary trees be approved.

2. The Proposal 2.1 As Members are aware conditions are frequently imposed when planning permission is granted. The approval of details in relation to conditions and the discharge of conditions (the confirmation that development has been carried out in accordance with the approved details) is normally dealt with under delegated powers.

2.2 A request has been received in relation to the permission for a single dwelling (ref EN/10/00920/FUL) for the approval of tree works. The relevant condition states:

“The landscaping scheme required to be submitted by Condition No.2 hereof shall include the retention of all trees along the southwest boundary of the site and none of these existing trees shall be felled or lopped unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Should any of the trees be removed they shall be replaced with specimens of a similar species, height and spread, the details of which shall first be agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.”

2.3 This condition was attached to protect the residential amenity of the occupiers of Leaholm, which adjoins the site to the southwest. Under a previous planning permission, Officers had agreed a reduction in height of the boundary trees to 6m under delegated powers.

2.4 The applicant has written to the Council under the current scheme to request permission to reduce the height of the trees to 5m to enable the installation of solar panels on the southwest facing roof slope.

Development Control Committee 44 of 132 Date printed 9 February 2011

3. The Site and Surroundings 3.1 The application site previously formed part of the side garden to ‘South Reach’ on the northwest side of the High Street. South Reach has a wide frontage on the highway boundary and extends backwards into the plot. The River Nene runs to the north of the site, forming a natural rear boundary. The land falls gradually from the highway down to the river. 3.2 The southwest boundary with Leaholm is defined by a row of Leylandii trees

4. Policy Considerations 4.1 National Planning Policy Guidance PPS1– Sustainable Development PPS3 – Housing PPS25 – Development and Flood Risk 4.2 Regional Plan (RSS8) On 10th November 2010 the High Court ruled that the Secretary of State's decision to revoke Regional Spatial Strategies was unlawful as it had been taken without primary legislation. A statement was then issued by the Government reiterating their intention to remove RSSs and that this should be treated as a material consideration. However following further legal action the Secretary of State has now agreed that until the further court case in mid January it is for a Local Planning Authority to decide how much weight to attach to the letters that the Government have issued about Regional Spatial Strategies. 4.3 North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy 2008 Policy 1 – Strengthening the Network of Settlements Policy 7 – Delivering Housing Policy 9 - Distribution and Location of Development Policy 10 – Distribution of Housing Policy 13 – General Sustainable Development Principles 4.4 Rural North, Oundle and Thrapston Plan Inspectors Modifications, 8 July 2009 Policy 2 – Windfall Development

The Rural North Oundle and Thrapston Plan went through an examination process in 2008 and 2009. Following this examination on 8 July 2009 the Inspector found the document sound. However, as yet the Council has not adopted the Plan as a Development Plan Document as such the Council is still treating the document as emerging policy.

5. Relevant Planning History 5.1 07/02061/FUL Detached dwelling and garage. WITHDRAWN 5.2 08/00625/FUL Detached dwelling and garage. REFUSED 5.3 08/01342/FUL Detached dwelling and garage. APPROVED 5.4 09/00920/FUL Detached dwelling and garage. APPROVED

6. Consultations and Representations 6.1 Leaholm House: Refer to the previous agreement to top out the trees to a height of 6m.

7. Evaluation

7.1 The impact on residential amenity is the sole consideration in the discharge of this condition

Development Control Committee 45 of 132 Date printed 9 February 2011

7.2 The rationale behind the imposition of the condition detailed in 2.2 above is that the Leylandii trees serve to screen the development site from the adjacent dwelling. When the Council considered the application, the neighbours expressed concerns regarding the possible overbearing impact of the dwelling on the rear of their property. Having consulted the occupiers of this property on the proposed reduction in height of the trees, an objection was received based on the fact that the agreed height had previously been set at 6m.

7.3 The approved plans, which include levels details and street scene elevations, show that at a height of 5m, the trees immediately alongside the approved dwelling would be as high as the eaves. Above this level, the roof would slope away from the boundary and the neighbouring property. Taking this into account, Officers are of the view that the reduction in height of the boundary trees would have an acceptable impact on the residential amenity of the occupiers of Leaholm.

8. Other Issues 8.1 Crime and Disorder - this application does not raise any significant issues. 8.2 Access for Disabled – the application does not raise any significant issues.

9 Recommendation 9.1 That works to the boundary trees to reduce their height to 5m be approved under condition 3 of planning permission EN/10/00920/FUL

Development Control Committee 46 of 132 Date printed 9 February 2011

7:30 o’clock Meeting

Committee Report Committee Date : 9 February 2011 Printed: 28 January 2011

Case Officer Anna Lee EN/10/01277/REM

Date received Date valid Overall Expiry Ward Parish 9 July 2010 29 July 2010 28 October 2010 Kings Forest Kings Cliffe

Applicant Charles Church

Agent 3D Planning Ltd - Mr T Slater

Location Land Between Willow Lane And Fineshade Close Wood Road Kings Cliffe Northamptonshire

Proposal Reserved Matters: Erection of 145 homes, roads, infrastructure and associated landscaping pursuant to outline planning permission EN/05/00620/OUT dated 14.08.2008

The application is brought forward for determination by Development Control Committee because it is a major proposal.

1 Summary of Recommendation

1.1 That permission be GRANTED subject to conditions.

2. The Proposal

2.1 Outline planning permission has been granted for a residential development of not more than 150 dwellings on the site, together with associated access road off Wood Road, under EN/05/00620/OUT. This application seeks reserved matters approval for all other matters, including layout, scale, appearance and landscaping.

2.2 The application was amended on 14.01.2011 to include reduction in the number of proposed dwellings (reduced from 150 to 145), re-siting of the LEAP and LAP areas, and minor changes to the layout and materials. Also, additional information has been received in respect of play equipment details, levels, drainage and landscaping. Consultees and local residents have been re-notified of these proposals.

2.3 145 Dwellings in total are proposed in this reserved matters submission and below is a summary of the property types:

115 Market properties made up of:

• 4 x two bedroom properties • 42 x three bedroom properties • 48 x four bedroom properties • 21 x five bedroom properties

Development Control Committee 47 of 132 Date printed 9 February 2011

30 Affordable properties made up of:

• 15 x two bedroom properties • 15 x three bedroom properties

3 The Site and Surroundings

3.1 The application site lies on the north side of Wood Road, between existing residential cul de sacs, Willow Lane to the east and Millwood Way, Daleswood Rise and Fineshade Close to the west. Located some 60 metres north of the site is the disused railway which is a wildlife corridor known as ‘Kings Cliffe Disused Railway Local Wildlife Site’. Another local wildlife site lies immediately adjacent to the site to the north-west, known as ‘Kings Cliffe Meadow’.

3.2 The site measures approximately 4.9 hectares in area and comprises of two grass fields separated by an established hedgerow running east-west across the middle of the site. The front of the site is occupied by an agricultural building (open-sided barn), that is currently in use for the storage of hay and agricultural equipment. A stone wall measuring some 1.0 metre in height surrounds the southern boundary of the site to Wood Road. Hedgerows and trees border the site on the eastern and western boundaries.

3.3 Millwood Way and Daleswood Rise to the immediate west of the site are relatively modern residential developments and Fineshade Close is characterised by 1970s style terraced properties. The properties to the east in Willow Lane are 1980s red brick and tile houses. The properties fronting Wood Road to the south of the site are of a mixed age and style, and consist mainly of two storey developments. Abutting the south- eastern site corner is King’s Cliffe Social Club, with residential properties adjacent to this fronting Willow Lane. To the north-east of the site, opposite Willow Lane, is King’s Cliffe and Oundle Middle School.

3.4 The site falls outside of the conservation area and is separated from the conservation area by the main road (Wood Road).

3.5 There are some onsite gradients. The land rises steadily from Wood Road up towards the rear of the site, in the south to north direction.

4 Policy Considerations

4.1 National Planning Policy Guidance: PPS1– Sustainable Development PPS3 – Housing PPS5 – Planning for the Historic Environment PPS7 – Sustainable Development in Rural Areas PPS9 – Biodiversity and Geological Conservation PPG13 – Transport PPG17 – Planning for Open Space, Sport and Recreation PPS23 – Planning and Pollution Control PPG24 – Planning and Noise PPS25 – Planning and Flood Risk

Development Control Committee 48 of 132 Date printed 9 February 2011

4.2 East Midlands Regional Plan, March 2009 On 10th November 2010 the High Court ruled that the Secretary of State's decision to revoke Regional Spatial Strategies was unlawful as it had been taken without primary legislation. A statement was then issued by the Government reiterating their intention to remove RSSs and that this should be treated as a material consideration. However following further legal action the Secretary of State has now agreed that until the further court case in mid January it is for a Local Planning Authority to decide how much weight to attach to the letters that the Government have issued about Regional Spatial Strategies. Policy 1 – Regional Core Objectives Policy 2 – Promoting Better Design Policy 3 – Distribution of New Development Policy 13b – Housing Provision (Northamptonshire) Policy 17 – Regional Priorities for Managing the Release of Land for Housing Policy 26 – Protecting and Enhancing the Region’s Natural and Cultural Heritage Policy 27 – Regional Priorities for the Historic Environment Policy 28 – Regional Priorities for Environmental and Green Infrastructure Policy 29 – Priorities for Enhancing the Region’s Biodiversity Policy 32 – A Regional Approach to Water Resources and Water Quality Policy 35 – A Regional Approach to Managing Flood Risk Policy 39 – Regional Priorities for Energy Reduction and Efficiency Policy 40 – Regional Priorities for Low Carbon Energy Generation Policy 41 – Regional Priorities for Culture, Sport and Recreation Policy 43 – Regional Transport Objectives Policy 45 – Regional Approach to Traffic Growth Reduction Policy 46 – A Regional Approach to Behavioural Change Policy 48 – Regional Car Parking Standards Policy MKSM SRS Northamptonshire 1 Policy MKSM SRS Northamptonshire 2

4.3 MKSM Sub-Regional Strategy Strategic Policy 3 – Sustainable Communities

4.4 North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy, June 2008: Policy 1 – Strengthening the Network of Settlements Policy 6 – Infrastructure Delivery and Developer Contributions Policy 7 – Delivering Housing Policy 9 – Distribution & Location of Development Policy 10 – Distribution of Housing Policy 13 – General Sustainable Development Principles Policy 14 – Energy Efficiency and Sustainable Construction Policy 15 – Sustainable Housing Provision

4.5 East Northamptonshire Local Plan, 1996 GEN3 - Infrastructure, Services and Amenities Policy H4 – Variety of Dwelling Types and Styles Policy RL3 – Open space for New Development Policy RL4 – Play areas for New Development

4.6 Rural North, Oundle and Thrapston Plan (Inspector’s modifications report 8 July 2009): The Rural North Oundle and Thrapston Plan went through an examination process in 2008 and 2009. Following this examination on 8 July 2009 the Inspector found the document sound. However, as yet the Council has not adopted the Plan as a Development Plan Document as such the Council is still treating the document as emerging policy.

Development Control Committee 49 of 132 Date printed 9 February 2011

Policy 1 – Settlement Roles Policy 2 – Windfall Development in Settlements Policy 3 – Comprehensive Development Policy 5 – Transport Network Policy 6 – Residential Parking Standards Policy 7 – Flood Risk Policy 8 – Housing Mix Policy 9 – Buildings of Local Architectural or Historic Interest Policy 10 – Protection of Local Sites of Conservation Interest and Designation of Local Nature Reserves Policy 11 – Enhancing Biodiversity Policy 12 – Considerate Construction Policy 13 – Affordable Housing Requirements Policy 15 – Open Space, Sport and Recreation Facilities Policy KCF2 – Willow Lane/Wood Road (Strategy and Allocations)

4.7 Supplementary Planning Guidance: Planning Out Crime in Northamptonshire, Feb 2004 Rockingham Forest Countryside Design Guide: Building on Tradition, 2000 Wood Road, King’s Cliffe Development Brief, 1999

4.8 Supplementary Planning Document: Design SPD, March 2009

4.9 Other Documents: Highway Authority Standing Advice for Planning Authorities, Working Draft July 2008 Northamptonshire Place and Movement Guide, 2008 Manual for Streets, 2007

5 Relevant Planning History

5.1 The original outline planning permission EN/05/00620/OUT, was granted on 14.08.2008.

5.2 An application has been submitted to the council to discharge condition 22 (landscape management plan) and condition 23 (adder mitigation measures) of the outline permission EN/05/00620/OUT. This application has been given reference number EN/10/02203/CND and is still pending consideration.

6 Consultations and Representations

6.1 Local residents: 29 Letters received from the occupants at 16 West Street (concerns), 19 West Street (objection), 34 West Street (objection), 55/57 West Street (concerns), 102 West Street (2 letters of objection), 104 West Street (concerns); 29 Wood Road (objection), 34 Wood Road (objection), 35 Wood Road (concerns), 38 Wood Road (concerns), 58 Wood Road (objection), 100 Wood Road (2 letters of objection), 104 Wood Road (concerns), 115 Wood Road (concerns/objection); Homes Barn, Wood Road (objection); 2 Willow Lane (2 letters received with comments and objection), 28 Willow Lane (objection), 30 Willow Lane (objection); 4 Park Street (concerns), 14 Park Street (objection), 56 Park Street (comments); 4 Bridge Street (comment); Kirk’s Lodge (objection); Alders Farm, Blatherwycke Road (comments); Rose Lodge, Wansford Road (objection); Crown House, Hall Yard (concerns). Two further letters of objection have been received, where the address of these letters are unknown. The reasons for objection, concerns and comments of local residents are summarised below:

Development Control Committee 50 of 132 Date printed 9 February 2011

Principle of Development

• The number of dwellings proposed would be too many • The development would be too dense, too cramped • The development is too large for the village • The local infrastructure and amenities cannot cope with the increase in house numbers, including roads, electricity, water, drainage and local services • “Kings Cliffe has two schools, two shops, a post office, church, public house, social club and societies – all these facilities provide a community entirely suitable for the development. However, such development ought not to threaten or have an adverse effect on the existing community”

Character and Appearance

• Scale and nature of the development is out of keeping with the village • Loss of village character and changing the village to an ‘urban’ character • The development would not be in-keeping with the rural setting • The development would be poor pastiche • The site is positioned on a hill slope • Three-storey houses would be out of keeping with the surrounding area • The provision of red pantile roofs would be out of keeping and a complete eyesore • “The Rockingham Forest Guide Building on Tradition should be accepted as wise advice” • The development would have an adverse effect on the conservation area

Neighbour Amenity

• The play area would result in noise and a loss of privacy for the existing residents • Loss of privacy (35 Wood Road) • Overlooking (35 Wood Road) • Noise

Highway Issues

• Impact on highway safety • Design of the junction at Wood Road is unsatisfactory and dangerous • Increase in traffic, impact on local traffic i.e. school traffic and traffic from doctors surgery and sports centre on Wood Road • The village is poorly served by public transport • Highway improvements should be made in the area to help facilitate pedestrian movement, i.e. including a new crossing, traffic calming • Insufficient parking on site • Impact on local parking, “parking in the village is already very congested” • Construction traffic should not be allowed up Willow Lane, “Willow Lane is not capable of taking heavy traffic” and how would construction traffic be managed?

Social Issues

• There is little local employment and therefore people would have to commute to work • The development would cause disruption to local residents. Local residents request that phasing be considered in order to minimise disruption to local residents, given the scale of the development • The development would lead to two separate communities “old village and new town”

Development Control Committee 51 of 132 Date printed 9 February 2011

Housing

• There are a limited number of affordable properties • There should be more two bedroomed properties • It is unclear how the affordable housing would be phased • The arrangements with the housing association are unclear • “There are already numerous properties for sale or rent in the village which have been empty or awaiting sale/rent for many months, in some cases, years”

The Environment

• There is very little open space within the development • It is unclear who would be responsible for the maintenance of the play area • Effect on wildlife • Environment Impact Assessment (EIA) should be required for the development • Concerns about risk of flooding, “the existing drains cannot cope with the adverse rainfall”, “with some store drainage improvement still caused flooding along Wood Road and to houses fronting onto West Street” • Effect on drainage and sewerage • Lack of initiatives to reduce carbon emissions and help sustainable living • Lack of details on street lighting • Concerns that archaeological features in the field west of the social club would be adversely affected

Other Issues

• “The outline development appears to provide opportunities for further development on the land to the north. The open ended roads should be closed off.” • “There is the matter of the proposal by Augean Plc to deposit radioactive waste from the nuclear industry in the Kings Cliffe landfill until 2026. This case is currently under appeal. The effects of the radioactive emissions on local people are uncertain.”

6.2 Letter received from Sensible Development for King’s Cliffe (SEND): SEND conducted a survey of King’s Cliffe Households to find out the level of acceptance (or refusal) for the scheme. From this survey they found that: • No one supported the application for 150 houses; • 31.5% wanted 50 houses; • 68.5% said they wanted 39 houses or less.

6.3 Letter received from Campaign to Protect Rural England (CPRE) representative for East Northamptonshire. The CPRE’s comments are summarised below: • The application needs to be considered in light of the pending applications at Priors Hall and Creed Road. “Putting these together, the total number of properties proposed for the Rural North of the District is very considerable, and this means that special consideration should be given to the social impact of these developments on the area.” • There would be pressures put on the facilities of the Prince William School. • “The MKSM Strategy stressed that developments in housing should be employment based, there seems to have been no consideration taken of where the people who live in these houses would find employment”. • “Without planned employment land coordinated with the scheme, it is not possible to predict accurately the extra traffic movements that will arise from this development”. • A current assessment has not been made of the housing need in the King’s Cliffe area • There is a shortage of ‘first time buyer’ properties. • There is no statement connected with this application of the infrastructure that will be needed to support it.

Development Control Committee 52 of 132 Date printed 9 February 2011

6.4 King’s Cliffe Parish Council: The parish council’s objection/concerns are summarised and listed below:

• The parish council would wish to see the housing numbers reduced and would not wish to see more than 100 houses on this site; • The development should be phased; • Impact on village services due to the scale of the development; • Impact on traffic movements within the village and Wood Road; • “There appears to be no provision for the sustainable movement of people from the site to the village services. This will encourage people to drive to the shops, which will increase the level of congestion in these areas”; • Noise and disturbance to residents from road traffic and the social club; • Concerns about electricity supply, “The electricity supply to Kings Cliffe is to frequent interruption. In response to this, we have previously been told that the village is at full capacity for the supply that has been made to it. Assuming this to be the case can we be advised when the electricity supply is to be upgraded?” • Concerns about storm water flooding/draining from the site; • Concerns about creating entry points from the site to the land at the rear; • Concerns about the height of the development, in particular the three storey properties, due to the gradient of the site; • The parish council requests that the roof colours of the dwellings are contemporary colours i.e. grey brown, “as ‘Collyweston’ slate colour would blend in with the rest of the existing village”. In particular, the parish council is concerned about the view of the development from Wood Road; • Concerns about parking.

The parish council has requested for clarification on the following matters:

• Would the existing farm buildings be demolished? • Would the roads on site be adopted? • How sewerage would be dealt with and what is the position of condition 12 (drainage)? • At what stage would the play area be completed and available for use? • When would the cricket field be transferred to the parish council? • What is the criteria for applying for the affordable homes, will these be for rent or for sale and whether these will be through a housing association?

6.5 Local highway authority (NCC): No objection, subject to the construction of the development in accordance with the specification of Northamptonshire County Council and to an appropriate agreement. Conditions are recommended to require (1) that hard surface materials be used to form the estate street throughout the development, (2) that adequate means of drainage be provided to prevent the unregulated discharge of surface water onto the highway, and (3) that details be submitted to show the maximum and minimum gradients (to ensure that these meet the NCC design criteria).

6.6 Rights of Way Officer (Northamptonshire County Council): no objection, as the proposal does not affect a public right of way.

6.7 Ramblers Association: “We are pleased to see that a pedestrian link to Willow Lane and the school is still being provided”.

Development Control Committee 53 of 132 Date printed 9 February 2011

6.8 Wildlife Trust: Consider there to be opportunities for incorporating soft landscaping and biodiversity features that would help to promote wildlife and biodiversity. “In our opinion, it is important to not introduce any non-native or invasive species into either terrestrial or aquatic environments. Therefore, any soft landscaping elements that it is intended to include within this development proposal should be provided for by the use of native species (of plants, shrubs and trees).” Also, the Wildlife Trust has raised the following concerns about the use of the area of land to the north of the application site as cricket land: “Given the most recent history of problems, caused to both habitats and protected species, arising from local development projects such as the Community Sports Facility site, for example, we are very worried and cautious about just what any intended further development in this identified location is going to mean in terms of direct or indirect loss, damage and/or disturbance to the biodiversity and habitats integrity/connectivity of the general King’s Cliffe area”.

6.9 Natural England: No objection, subject to a condition to investigate the existing farm buildings for bats. Should bats be discovered then works shall cease and Natural England shall be contacted for further advice. Natural England understands that a mitigation scheme for the protection of adders has been conditioned as part of the outline and would wish to be consulted on the exact mitigation proposal. They have requested conditions to require the submission of a working design, methods statement and timetable of works before commencement of development and that no site clearance works be carried out during the bird breeding season.

6.10 Northants Badger Group: Have no objection or comments to make.

6.11 Environment Agency: no objection, subject to conditions to control surface water drainage on the site. The Environment Agency has advised that there are three options to be considered for the discharge of surface water, (see recommendations below in section 7.12).

6.12 Crime Prevention Design Advisor (Northamptonshire Police): no objection in principle and makes the following recommendations, in order to reduce the likelihood of crime, disorder and anti-social behaviour occurring: (i) Some areas lack good natural surveillance and these can be enhanced with specifically designed fencing; (ii)Lighting for the development should be to approved British Standards (BS5489) for adoptable areas. For unadoptable areas, including the parking courts and footpaths, these should be with a minimum uniformity level of 25%; (iii)Would recommend that the development be built to attain the ‘Secure by Design’ award and the external doors and windows to be installed at the ground floor and easily accessible first floors of the houses be made secure to standards. The submitted layout generally meets the Secure By Design criteria.

6.13 Northamptonshire Fire and Rescue Service: Would encourage the developers to consider (1) the installation of appropriate hard wired fire detection systems in all dwellings; (2) smoke extraction systems; (3) lighting and surveillance systems; (4) security measures; (5) the minimum access route specifications (for road width and gateways 3.7 metres, minimum height clearance 4.0 metres); (6) that road bases be built to withstand 14 tonnes; (7) the provision of fire hydrants and sprinklers; and (8) that adequate waste management facilities be provided.

Development Control Committee 54 of 132 Date printed 9 February 2011

6.14 Sport England: No objection and supports the creation of additional local sports facilities resulting from the development. In particular, Sport England notes that the original outline was approved on the basis of the completion of a legal agreement which covered the provision of open space in particular the transfer of land, referred to as the ‘cricket land’ located to the north of the application site, to the parish council.

6.15 E-on Central Networks: No objections and advises that Central Networks has network within the site and within close proximity of the site

6.16 ENC Housing Strategy: Are content that the submitted affordable housing proposals satisfies the requirements set out in the Section 106 (S106) agreement.

6.17 ENC Environmental Protection (land contamination): no objection, as the officer notes that conditions to investigate and remediate contamination were placed on the outline planning permission.

6.18 ENC Environmental Protection Officer (noise): no objections, (see recommendations below in paragraph 7.10.6).

6.19 ENC Design Officer: The Design Officer considers that the amendments have resulted in an overall improvement to the scheme, and therefore, supports the scheme. In particular, the officer makes the following comments:

• The revised layout of the public open space area would create more activity and definition around the eastern edge of the public open space; • The large rear car parking court which was formerly proposed to the east of the site has been removed and parking is now proposed adjacent to plot 102; • The latest drainage and level drawings demonstrates that the proposed built form would broadly follow the contours of the site; • The officer is satisfied that the proposed materials would not create a uniform appearance; • The garden for plot 1 still appears small in relation to the building footprint; • It is unclear which houses could be adapted to Life Home Standard; • The proposed boundary treatments would appear acceptable, “They appear to provide strong enclosure to the street, and brick walls are used where rear garden boundaries present to the public realm”; • “Further details has now been provided for planting and play equipment to be incorporated. I am still not completely convinced that there is a clear design strategy for this space”.

Overall, the Design Officer comments: “The high quality of the proposal is reflected in the amended Building for Life assessment. You will note that overall, I assess the scheme to achieve 15.5, which exceeds the minimum aspiration set out in the Sustainable Design SPD.”

Development Control Committee 55 of 132 Date printed 9 February 2011

6.20 ENC Conservation Officer (tree officer): The tree officer has raised concerns about how the trees would be retained and managed throughout the build process and does not consider that a clear design has been proposed for the open space area at the front of the site. The tree officer makes the following comments in respect of the open space: “The space is currently dominated by play equipment at the southern end of the site, which does not sit comfortably with the remaining space. With the proposed layout of this part of the site, it is likely that the initial view of the area will be over dominated by play equipment” and “the group of trees proposed at the centre of the open space does not appear to follow any particular design, and will, in time, block any view from or to the properties on the eastern edge of the site”. The tree officer’s other comments are detailed in paragraphs 7.8.5 and 7.8.7 of this report.

6.21 ENC Waste Management: no objection, however, “due to the size of the estate and number of properties, we would suggest that the developer provides both litter and dog bins on the estate. The litter bins must be close top to prevent wind blown litter. An emptying programme must be put in place by the developer until the estate is adopted when the council will take over the emptying of such bins if they are located adjacent to the adopted highway.”

6.22 ENC Senior Conservation Officer: is satisfied that the proposal would not have an adverse effect on the setting of the conservation area.

7 Evaluation

7.1 The following issues are relevant to the determination of this application:

7.2 Principle of Development

7.2.1 Outline planning permission has been granted for a residential development of not more than 150 dwellings on this site under EN/05/00620/OUT and the submitted application proposes 145 dwellings. The principle of a residential development of this scale has been established by the outline planning permission granted in 2008, and therefore, the council can only consider the other reserved matters in this application, including, layout, scale, appearance and landscaping.

7.2.2 Compliance with policies: Notwithstanding the fact the principle of residential development has already been considered and established in the outline planning permission, the proposed development is compliant with the current national, regional and local planning policies and local development strategies. This includes the 2008 North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy (NNCSS) and the emerging Rural North, Oundle and Thrapston Plan (RNOTP). Policy 1 of the NNCSS identifies Oundle, Raunds and Thrapston as the main rural service centres for the rural north east where development would be directed and King’s Cliffe is identified as a secondary focus for development. ‘Local Service Centre’ means that the village facilities serve a wider rural population than those who live within the village itself and the focus for growth in a Local Service Centre is to meet locally identified needs, whilst supporting the services of the wider rural area. Kings Cliffe’s function as a local service centre is also recognised by the evidence based studies of the RNOTP and the application site was identified in the submission stage of the RNOTP (in January 2008) as an site allocation for residential development “of between 145 and 150 dwellings and associated infrastructure” (Policy KCF2 – Willow Lane/Wood Road). The development plan allocation under Policy KCF2 has since been endorsed by the Inspector following the RNOTP examinations in 2009 and therefore holds significant weight, albeit that the

Development Control Committee 56 of 132 Date printed 9 February 2011

plan has not been adopted.

7.2.3 Dwellings numbers: Local residents have raised concerns that the number of proposed dwellings would be too many; a development of 145 dwellings would be too large for the village; and have raised concerns about density. The number of dwellings to be submitted in the reserved matters has been established by the outline planning permission, where condition 2 of the planning permission states: “The reserved matters submission required by condition 1 of this permission shall include not more than 150 dwellings in total and open space”. Furthermore, a development of 145 to 150 dwellings on this site has been set out by Policy KCF2, mentioned above.

7.2.4 Density - The issue of density was also considered in the original outline application, where based on the maximum density recommendation made by PPG3 (the relevant national planning guidance on housing matters at the time), it was recognised that the site could outturn between 145 to 240 dwellings. In order to ensure that the housing numbers on the site does not exceed the housing targets set for Kings Cliffe in the period from 2001 to 2021, a minimum density of 150 dwellings had been set on the outline planning permission. For a proposed development of 145 dwellings on a site area of 4.9 hectares, this creates a density of 30 dwellings per hectare. This density per hectare would be consistent with that recommended by former PPG3 and subsequently superseded PPS3. However, the indicative minimum density of 30 dwellings per hectare was recently deleted from PPS3 (in June 2010) to allow local authorities flexibility to set density ranges that suit local needs. Whilst the housing density of the proposed development would appear visually denser than those of the surrounding development, no significant harm would result on the surrounding area. The visual impact of the development on the character and appearance of the surrounding area, furthermore, is discussed in section 7.7 below. Overall, despite the recent change to PPS3, the proposed density is still acceptable as it makes the best use of land as still required by paragraphs 10, 45 and 46 in PPS3 and it would be difficult to refuse the application on grounds of density or dwelling numbers.

7.2.5 The CPRE comments that housing should be employment based so that people living in the houses would be able to find employment and employment land should be coordinated within the scheme. However, it is important to recognise that the application site is allocated in the development plan solely for residential development and that no employment use is included as part of the proposals or infrastructure. Notwithstanding this, as one of the larger villages in the north of the district, King’s Cliffe is recognised as having a relatively good service and employment base. Economic opportunities are identified for King’s Cliffe in the RNOTP, as this mentions the redevelopment of a former industrial site near Wansford, the completion of a workshop scheme at the station yard site in Kingsmead and the site allocation made for employment use under Policy KC1F (Kingsmead Small and Medium Enterprise Site).

7.2.6 On another matter, the CPRE and some local residents have commented that an up to date assessment of the housing need in King’s Cliffe has not been made and there are a number of properties that have been on the local market for rent and sale for a period of time. The issue of housing need in the district and in King’s Cliffe was extensively considered during the RNOTP examination. Policy 10 of the NNCSS sets an indicative housing requirement for the rural areas of the district at 1460 dwellings (over a period from 2001 to 2021) and King’s Cliffe is identified to provide 200 dwellings as part of its overall rural provision (paragraph 4.13, RNOTP). As the number of dwellings on the site has already been agreed by the outline planning permission and Policy KCF2 of the RNOTP, housing need is not a matter for consideration at this reserved matters submission. However, it is important to recognise that rather based on current housing need, the council has to consider housing provision against the longer term housing targets for King’s Cliffe and for the district, given King’s Cliffe’s Local Service Centre role.

Development Control Committee 57 of 132 Date printed 9 February 2011

7.2.7 Therefore, the principle of development is acceptable, subject to the issues set out below.

7.3 Impact on Local Infrastructure and Developer Contributions

7.3.1 Local residents have raised concerns that local infrastructure and amenities cannot cope with the increase in house numbers, including roads, electricity, water, drainage and local services. In addition, concerns have been raised about the cumulative effect of the proposed development together with the other developments in the district i.e. Priors Hall, and Creed Road in Oundle, and that the proposed development would put pressures on the facilities provided by the other areas such as Prince William School.

7.3.2 The infrastructure requirements for the proposed development were considered in the outline planning application and the following community benefits have been secured in the form of a S106 legal agreement:

• affordable housing (30 units) • education • open space • sport facility (cricket land) • financial contribution of £25,000

7.3.3 The education contributions are towards Prince William School in Oundle and King’s Cliffe Endowed School. Therefore, should there be insufficient school places at the above schools to accommodate the pupils arising from the development, the education contributions would be available using the following calculations (as listed in Schedule 2 of the legal agreement):

Table 1: 2 bed houses 2 bed flats 3 bed houses 4 bed houses 5 bed houses Lower 4-8 £413 £239 £2,093 £4,645 £4,727 Upper 13-15 £133 £269 £1,240 £2,306 £4,079 Sixthform £119 £137 £288 £389 £1,497

7.3.4 The legal agreement has secured the provision of public open areas on the site, together with maintenance contributions of £513.10 per dwelling to be provided for equipped children’s play space and £43.17 per dwelling for informal children’s play space (subject to a maximum total of £83,440.00). In addition, an off-site sport facility (cricket land) has been secured to the north of the application site and this area of land would be transferred to the parish council together with a maintenance contribution (at a rate of £3.60 per square metre).

7.3.5 As most of these community benefits would be provided within the proposed development or close to the development and other infrastructure (including roads, electricity and water connections, surface water and foul drainage systems) would be provided within the development site, it would be difficult to justify that the proposal would have an adverse effect on local infrastructure and the local community. The impact of the proposed development on the local highway network and drainage, and issues associated with water and electricity supplies, are discussed in more detail the later sections of this report

Development Control Committee 58 of 132 Date printed 9 February 2011

7.4 Phasing

7.4.1 Local residents and the parish council have requested that phasing be considered in order to minimise disruption to local residents. The developer has advised that the site would be phased in its construction over a period of approximately three to four years from commencement of development. Given that it would not be possible for all 145 homes to be completed within a single year and the fact that the number of dwellings constructed is likely to be dependent on the sale of properties, phasing is likely to take place by nature. However, in order to ensure the construction of the dwellings are undertaken in logical, integrated manner and in order to help minimise disruption to the immediately surrounding local residents and in the interest of visual amenity, a condition to require the submission of phasing details before commencement of development is recommended. This condition is considered to be reasonable and necessary, given the scale and nature of the proposal.

7.5 Housing Mix

7.5.1 In accordance with the requirements of saved Policy H4 of the adopted local plan and Policy 8 of the RNOTP, the application proposes a variety of dwelling types and styles. The proposed house types are relatively evenly split between two, three, four and five bedroom house types (with two bedroom houses at 13%; three bedroom houses at 39%; four bedroom houses at 33%; and five bedroom houses at 14%). Whilst the percentage of two bedroom properties is lower than that of three and four bedroom properties, this reason would be insufficient to justify a refusal of planning permission, given the overall mix of house types proposed within the development.

7.6 Affordable Housing

7.6.1 The number of affordable properties to be provided within the development was established by the outline planning permission and 30 units have been secured in the S106 legal agreement. Whilst this would only provide 20% affordable housing from the development, the Housing Needs Surveys conducted in 2004 and 2007 suggests that this number of units would be sufficient to address the immediate and longer term affordable housing needs of the village.

7.6.2 The S106 agreement requires an ‘Affordable Housing Scheme’ be submitted to the district council on the submission of the reserved matters. Within this scheme, information is required on: the location of affordable housing; details of any prospective Registered Social Landlord (RSL); details of the programme for construction, and details of the timing of the transfer of the affordable housing to the RSL. Accordingly, the Affordable Housing Scheme submitted by the applicant confirms the following:

• The affordable housing would be spread throughout the site. Eight of the units would be located along the frontage, north of the social club, and the remaining 22 units would be distributed within the site; • The registered RSL will be Spire Homes; • The affordable homes will be built on phase alongside the market housing “however, it is anticipated that all of the affordable homes will be completed by March 2012”; and • “Charles Church has an agreement exchanged with Spire Homes providing for the transfer of homes, on a plot by plot basis when the individual homes are completed”.

7.6.3 ENC Housing Strategy has confirmed that they are satisfied with these proposals.

Development Control Committee 59 of 132 Date printed 9 February 2011

7.7 Visual Impact

7.7.1 Scale – A development of no more than 150 dwellings on this site has been accepted in the outline planning application where it was considered that the site could be developed in a manner which would not harm the street scene or the character of the village. The currently submitted application proposes 145 dwellings. The proposed development would create a extension to the north west side of the village and this extension would increase the overall built form of the village by approximately 10%. However, there would be no undue harm from this proposal on the character and setting of the village. The proposed development would bear a close relationship with the existing built form to the south (along Wood Road) and would be located between existing developments along Willow Lane to the east and the residential developments in Millwood Way, Daleswood Rise and Fineshade Close to the west. The main public views of the proposed development are from Wood Road. The inclusion of large areas of soft landscaping and open space areas at the front of the site, together with the low density frontage style development proposed fronting Wood Road, would help to maintain the site’s open character. Furthermore, the perception of the scale of the development would be reduced by the way which the dwellings would be positioned back from the road and the fact that the majority of the proposed housing development would be constructed on a field at the rear, which would be concealed from the street scene by the development proposed at the front.

7.7.2 The proposed dwellings comprise of a mixture of two-storey and two and a half storey high properties. The majority of the development is made up of two-storey properties, with approximately 22 of the properties (15%) being two and a half storey. Seven of these two and a half storey properties would be positioned facing the front of the site (including plots 5, 6, 12 and 13 shown on the submitted street scene drawing) and the rest would be distributed throughout the remainder of the site. Whilst Wood Road is mainly characterised by two-storey high development, there would no harm from the proposed two and a half storey dwellings, as these would be positioned some distance away from the road and would be integrated within the proposed two-storey development.

7.7.3 Layout – The council adopted a Development Brief in 1999 which sets out the development and design principles for the site. Whilst recognising that it has been some time since this brief was produced, there are certain principles which are relevant to the consideration of the layout of the proposed development. The brief suggests that the design objectives for the development is largely dependent upon creating permeability of movement throughout the area, particularly for pedestrians and cyclists (paragraph 5.7), and “roads should follow the contours, with footpath and cycle links forming short cuts between the vehicular routes. The inclusion of appropriately designed courts, reflecting the character of traditional court yards and set to the rear of the frontage buildings, will add variety to the layout”, (paragraph 5.13, Development Brief).

Development Control Committee 60 of 132 Date printed 9 February 2011

7.7.4 The submitted layout generally follows the principles in the adopted Development Brief. The principle access to the site is through Wood Road and the proposed access driveway follows the direction of the increase in land levels. Within the main part of the proposed housing development, the street network creates a continuous ‘loop’ through the site with emphasis on east-west movement. Two footpath/cycleway links (one to the existing housing development to the west and one to Willow Lane to the east) were identified on the indicative layout plan submitted in the outline planning application. These footpath/cycle connections have been carried across to the current submitted layout and would help to connect the site with the existing surrounding developments. In addition, a footpath connection is proposed running north-south through the centre of the site for the convenience of pedestrians. Overall, the proposed network of roads and pedestrian/cyclist connections would provide sufficient permeability for the site and most of these areas would be legible for users.

7.7.5 The option of providing a footpath/cyclist connection across the northern boundary of the site (outside of the application site) to allow a more direct means of connection between the school and sport facilities along Willow Lane and the existing residential development in Millwood Way/Daleswood Rise was explored at pre-application stage and during the course of the application. However, as any footpath provided along the northern boundary would be positioned significantly outset from the existing residential development to the west and would not provide a desirable connection for users, this connection has not been pursued. Instead, it was found that adequate pedestrian/cyclist connection could be provided within the application site by the footpaths proposed on the west and eastern boundaries. In particular, the footpath link positioned on the east boundary of the site has been relocated further up the site (repositioned from plot 91 to plot 86) to facilitate the movement of pedestrians/cyclists from the existing residential development to the west and the facilities located off Willow Lane.

7.7.6 Finally, in terms of layout, a mixture of parking methods have been incorporated within the layout to accommodate cars, including front and rear parking courts, and on-street parking areas. The public and private spaces are also generally clearly defined within the block structure.

7.7.7 Appearance – The 1999 Development Brief advises that building frontages should not be set to a uniform building line, but should be positioned to create visual interest and variety in the street scene. Whilst the proposed development is designed with dwellings positioned in-line with the road, the variety of buildings forms and layout (i.e. courtyards and small cul de sacs) would create a visually interesting and varied street scene. The brief, furthermore, advises: “The development should comprise buildings of contemporary design, which reflect the form, scale, materials and architectural details of the local vernacular” (paragraph 5.41, Development Brief). King’s Cliffe is situated within Rockingham Forest. The Rockingham Forest Guide recognises that traditional villages are characterised by a mixture of house types and buildings, with variation in architectural style, detail, house sizes, ridge and eave heights, and rooflines, normally with chimney stacks. In addition, buildings are normally rectangular in plan and have steeply pitched roofs. The design/style and building form of the houses proposed fronting Wood Road would follow the traditional principles laid in the Rocking Forest Guide. More contemporary house designs are also included within the development and these would be well integrated with the more traditionally designed buildings. Overall, the proposed development generally conforms with the principles of the Development Brief and Rockingham Forest Guide.

Development Control Committee 61 of 132 Date printed 9 February 2011

7.7.8 Materials – The Development Brief recognises that the principle building materials traditionally used in King’s Cliffe is random coursed limestone and the roofing materials are traditionally Collyweston stone slate, thatch, blue slate and hand made clay pantiles. It is proposed that the properties fronting the open space at the front of the site and at the back of the site would be constructed in reconstituted stone (Forticrete Shearstone Cottage Milbourne Olde Heather) with grey slate roof tiles (Forticrete Gemini Slate). A palette of materials, consisting of reconstituted stone, red brick, buff brick and pantiles are proposed for the remaining housing development located within the site and a sample of these materials have been submitted to the local planning authority and would be available for Members to view at committee. The proposed reconstituted stone and grey slate would be in-keeping with the tone and colour of the materials used on the some of properties along Wood Road and is also reflected on some of the other properties in the village. The use of red brick and red pantile would not be out of keeping with the area, given similar materials are used on some of the more modern developments surrounding the site and the fact that a range of different materials are used on the existing surrounding properties. Furthermore, only a small proportion of the dwellings would be constructed using these materials and these properties would be concealed from the wider public views. The submitted Design and Access Statement advises that all of the properties will be timber framed and this material would be visually in-keeping with the properties in the surrounding area. Overall, subject to a condition to ensure that the development is constructed in accordance with the submitted details, there would be no significant visual harm from the proposal.

7.7.9 Levels – A condition has been placed on the outline planning permission on levels and a drawing to show the existing levels across the site and the proposed finish floor levels of the buildings has been submitted with the application. This information suggests that there is a rise in gradient from Wood Road to the back of the site, with the gradient being much steeper from the front of the site to the middle of the field and the levels become less steep towards the back of the site. The submitted information demonstrates that the proposed access driveway and dwellings would be built to follow the existing levels, and overall, these proposals would be acceptable.

7.8 Landscaping

7.8.1 Boundary treatments – The Design Officer comments: “The boundary treatments demonstrates that consideration has been given to their impact on the appearance of the public realm. The use of low brick walls to create definition to prominent areas, and 1.8 metre high brick walls to enclose rear gardens where they interfere with the public realm, are particularly strong features”. The submitted plans show proposals to demolish the existing stone wall and to construct a brick wall measuring 1.8 metres in height along the front boundary to Wood Road and along the east boundary to the social club. The agent has been requested to give consideration to an alternative form of treatment for the front boundary of the site that would be more attractive and in- keeping with the surrounding street scene and the outcome of these discussions will be reported in the committee updates.

Development Control Committee 62 of 132 Date printed 9 February 2011

7.8.2 A mixture of close boarded and larch lap fencing measuring 2.0 metres in height are proposed to separate the rear garden areas of the proposed dwellings. 2.0 Metre high close boarded fencing is proposed for the rear garden boundary of the dwellings located along the eastern and western periphery of the site and this would form the boundary treatment to Willow Lane and the residential development to the west. Subjected to suitable planting proposals being included within the rear garden of these dwellings, the proposed boundary treatments would not harm the local environment and would be sufficient to protect the privacy and amenities of the future occupiers of the proposed dwellings as well as the privacy and amenity of the existing surrounding occupiers.

7.8.3 ‘Metal estate railings’ to 1.2 metres in height are proposed around the front garden of the properties facing the access road and around the front gardens of the properties facing the field at the back of the site (northern boundary). Providing full details of the design and finish of railings are provided, there would be no visual harm from these proposals and a condition is recommended to require the submission of railing details before commencement of development. In addition to 1.2 metre high metal railings, other low height boundary treatments, including 0.9 metre high walls are proposed between the front garden of the properties and the main public areas. Overall, these treatments would add variety and interest to the street scene.

7.8.4 Hard landscaping – The hard landscaped areas cover mainly the access roads which run through the site and the footpath and pavement areas. Whilst black tarmac is the main material proposed for the roads, block paving of two different types would be incorporated within the hard surfaced areas of the development. This introduces a variation to the hard surface treatment, and therefore, should be supported.

7.8.5 Soft landscaping/planting – The tree Officer supports the provision of a ‘green link’ in the north-south direction across the centre of the site (which includes planting proposals on both sides of the footpath) and considers that the inclusion of tree planting within the paved areas would contribute to the aesthetics of the site and create a strong sense of character. Due to the fact that the provision for planting is mainly within the small front gardens of the properties, the officer initially raised concerns about the lack of planting structure within the new streets. Following the receipt of additional landscaping details in January 2011, the tree officer still has questions about the landscape design proposed, but is generally more satisfied with the planting proposed within the centre of the development.

7.8.6 Hedges and trees - The existing hedge which runs across the middle of the site and the hedges on the eastern and western boundaries are proposed for removal. Following the removal of these hedges, new trees are proposed to be planted within the gardens of the properties along the eastern and western borders of the site. The proposed planting of trees within the rear gardens of the dwellings on the eastern border of the site would help to soften the visual impact of the proposed housing development and the boundary treatment proposed along Willow Lane (the 2.0 metre high close boarding fencing). The proposal to remove the hedge and to have the rear gardens of the proposed dwellings facing the access track off Willow Lane furthermore would help to provide natural surveillance to the track. A reasonable level of tree planting would also be provided along the western boundary of the site to the properties at Millwood Way, Daleswood Rise and Fineshade Close.

Development Control Committee 63 of 132 Date printed 9 February 2011

7.8.7 The tree officer’s concerns about the retention and management of trees during the construction process are noted. The layout submitted in this reserved matter application show that some trees would be retained on the site and the dwellings would be positioned close to some existing trees. In the interest of ensuring that these existing trees would not be adversely affected by the development, conditions are recommended to require the submission of arboricultural details before commencement of development. This includes the provision of a tree protection plan and arboricultural method statement.

7.8.8 Open space - Formal planting, including a row of trees is proposed west and north of the open space area, adjacent to the proposed access road. This would create an attractive formal area of planting along the main entrance into the site. The tree officer has raised concerns about the group of trees proposed within the open space area and comments: “these proposed at the centre of the open space area does not appear to follow any particular design, and will, in time, block any view from or to the properties on the eastern edge of the site”. The area of trees proposed within the open space would be positioned midway up the site and would be positioned towards the eastern boundary of the site. Therefore, the proposed group of trees would not obstruct views of the open space area or harm its open character. Notwithstanding the concerns of the tree officer, it is possible that the proposed trees could contribute to the site by creating an informal planting area and this could add interest to the open space area both visually and functionally. Furthermore, the provision of suitable planting for this area (species of an appropriate type and height) would ensure that the proposed planting area would not unacceptably obstruct the front of the dwellings proposed east of the site. Therefore, a condition requiring the submission of an alternative landscaping scheme for this planting area is recommended.

7.8.9 Some local residents have commented that very little open space is included within the development. The amount of open space provision for this development has been set out in the outline planning application and has been secured in the S106 legal agreement. Furthermore, the details submitted with this reserved matters application show that an open space area of a reasonable scale would be provided at the front of the site to serve the proposed development.

7.8.10 Play equipment – The parish council has requested for LEAP/LAP areas to be provided at the front of the site to help integrate the new housing development with the rest of King’s Cliffe. Therefore, the LEAP/LAP areas are proposed at the front of the site and the equipment proposed for these areas include: a maypole, climbing frames, swing, ‘see-saw snake’, ‘fun-fone’, mini ‘dish roundabout’, ‘bee springy’, grass mounds, timber sleepers, bench and bins. The predominant material for the play equipment is plasti-cote and the play equipment would be in a range of primary and secondary colours.

Development Control Committee 64 of 132 Date printed 9 February 2011

7.8.11 The tree officer’s concern about the dominance of the play equipment at the front of the site is noted. However, with the exception of the two climbing frames and swing, the other play equipment and facilities are small/low height structures. It is understood that the LEAP/LAP areas have been positioned together and at the front of the site in order to help improve access for its users, given the typography of the site. The alternative to providing the play areas in one location, would be to separate the play areas within the open space area. However, the separation of the LEAP/LAP areas into two different locations may not overcome the issue of clutter and may have further visual implications. The open space area would be transferred to King’s Cliffe Parish Council and the parish council has confirmed that they have no objection to the proposed play equipment areas. Overall, the community benefits of providing the play equipment facilities would outweigh the minimal visual impact resulting from the development.

7.9 Impact on the Setting of the Conservation Area

7.9.1 The closest part of the development to the conservation area are the open space area and dwellings proposed at the front of the site. As the visual impacts of the proposed development would be acceptable for the reasons outlined in the previous section of this report, there would be no harm on the setting of the conservation area. The inclusion of traditional building designs and more traditional materials such as stone, grey slate and timber within the development, in particular, would improve the relationship of the development with the nearby conservation area.

7.10 Neighbouring Amenity

7.10.1 Nos. 1, 3, 5 Millwood Way – These properties are located immediately west of the proposed development. The ‘back to back’ distances between these properties and the proposed dwellings are 20 metres at the closest point and 26 metres at the furthest point. At these distances, there would be no undue overlooking, overbearing or overshadowing impact upon the occupiers in these properties. In addition, sufficient screening, comprising of 2.0 metre high close boarded fencing and tree planting, would be provided along the western boundary to these properties. This treatment would help to safeguard the privacy and amenities of the neighbouring occupiers. Garages (for plots 41 and 42) are proposed against the western boundary of the site adjacent to nos. 3 and 5 Millwood Way. However, no overbearing impact would occur, given the garages would be single-storey in height and would be partly concealed by the boundary treatment proposed along the west boundary. Finally, the proposed western footpath link would not have an adverse effect on the properties in Millwood Way as this would be linked directly into the play area and would be sufficiently positioned from the residential properties.

Development Control Committee 65 of 132 Date printed 9 February 2011

7.10.2 Nos. 31, 33 and 35 Wood Road – The back to back distance between nos. 31 and 33 Wood Road and the nearest proposed dwellings is over 20 metres. Therefore, there would be no undue harm on these properties in terms of overlooking, overbearing and overshadowing. The occupiers at no.35 Wood Road have raised concerns about overlooking and loss of privacy. The dwellings proposed along the southern boundary of the site would be positioned over 30 metres from the rear of the neighbouring property and at this distance there would be no undue overlooking on the neighbouring property. The ‘back to side’ distance between no.35 Wood Road and the dwellings proposed at the front of the site is 17 metres and there are no habitable room windows in the side of the neighbouring property that would be overlooked. The rear elevation of two of the proposed dwellings (plots 5 and 6) would face the rear garden of the neighbouring property. However, as these dwellings would be located 17 metres from the boundary to no.35 Wood Road, it would be difficult to justify a refusal of planning permission based on overlooking upon the rear garden of the neighbouring property. No.35 Wood Road is screened from the application site by existing boundary treatment including conifer planting measuring approximately 2.5 metres high and it would appear that these treatments fall within the ownership of the neighbouring property. In addition, 2.0 metre high close boarded fencing is proposed along the western and southern boundaries of the application site and this would also help to protect the privacy and amenities of the neighbouring occupiers.

7.10.3 Properties at Willow Lane (nos. 5, 7-9, 11-13) – The proposed dwellings would be positioned 18 metres from the rear of nos. 7 and 9 Willow Lane. However, as the proposed dwellings would be positioned at an angle and orientated away from the neighbouring properties, there would be no unacceptable impact on these properties in terms of overlooking, overshadowing and overbearing. Furthermore, nos. 5 and 11 and 13 Willow Lane would be positioned over 20 metres away, and therefore, no undue harm would occur.

7.10.4 Properties at Willow Lane (nos. 30, 28 and 18) – These properties are separated from the application site by the track which runs north of Willow Lane and would be positioned over 29 metres from the proposed development. Therefore, there would be no harm on these properties.

7.10.5 King’s Cliffe and Oundle Middle School – Again, the proposed development would be separated from the school by the access track and would be sufficiently positioned away from the school.

7.10.6 King’s Cliffe Social Club – The dwellings proposed east of the site would be positioned over 35 metres from the social club. At this distance, the proposed dwellings would be sufficiently positioned away from the social club and therefore are unlikely to be adversely affected by overlooking and noise from the main building of the social club. The Environmental Protection Officer has concerns about the effect of noise from the social club on the residential properties surrounding the proposed development. After taking into consideration the previous history of the club and the fact that there are existing residential properties positioned closer to the club, the officer has does not object to the proposal. However, the officer has recommended a condition to require the provision of acoustic fencing around the properties which back/side onto the social club (plots 103, 104 and 105).

7.10.7 The proposed open space and play areas would be screened from the social club by the 2.0 metre wall proposed along the east boundary and 2.0 metre high close boarded fencing is proposed to screen the dwellings proposed east of the site. Given that the social club is currently separated from the site by a chain-link fence measuring some 2.0 metres in height, the proposed boundary treatments would help to enhance screening to the social club and provide a clearer definition between the different spaces. Therefore, subject to the provision of appropriate fencing around the rear gardens of the dwelling proposed east of the site (plots 103, 104 and 105), in

Development Control Committee 66 of 132 Date printed 9 February 2011

accordance with the recommendations of the Environmental Protection Officer, there would be no harm from this proposal.

7.10.8 Other properties south of Wood Road (including nos. 38 and 40 Wood Road) – Plot 1, at a distance of some 25 metres, would be sufficiently located from these neighbouring properties. Therefore, no undue harm would occur. Local residents have raised concerns that the play area would result in noise and a loss of privacy for the existing residents. The residential properties positioned closest to the site are those located on the southern side of Wood Road. Given that the proposed play areas would be located over 20 metres away from these properties and due the separation from the road, there would no significant issues from this proposal in terms of noise and loss of privacy.

7.10.9 Overall, the impact on neighbour amenities would be insufficient to justify a refusal of planning permission on this application.

7.11 Highway Impact

7.11.1 The means of access into the site was considered in the outline planning permission and permission was granted for a vehicular access onto Wood Road (on the southern site boundary) to serve the proposed development. Therefore, the principle of the access are not matters for consideration in this application.

7.11.2 Concerns have been raised by local residents to the increase in traffic, the effect of the development on local traffic and the limited public transport facilities available within the village. Again, these matters were considered at the outline stage, together with the consideration of the principle of the access and the proposed development of not more than 150 houses on the site. To assist the local highway authority’s consideration of the traffic impact of the proposed development, a Traffic Assessment was submitted in the outline planning application and a more recent assessment has been submitted with the current application.

7.11.3 The local highway authority is satisfied with the submitted design of the road at the junction to Wood Road and the roads and footpath layouts proposed within the site. The local highway authority has no objection to the proposal subject to the construction of the development in accordance with the specification of Northamptonshire County Council (NCC) and to an appropriate agreement. The main roads and public footpaths are proposed for adoption and a plan has been submitted to show the proposed adoption areas (drawing number: 109 Revision A). The local highway authority has recommended conditions to require (1) that hard surface materials be used to form the estate street throughout the development, (2) that adequate means of drainage be provided to prevent the unregulated discharge of surface water onto the highway, and (3) that details be submitted to show the maximum and minimum gradients to ensure that the proposal meets the NCC design criteria. The suggested conditions have already been included on the outline planning permission (as conditions 5, 12, 13, 17, 18), and therefore, it would not be necessary to repeat these on this reserved matters.

7.11.4 Some local residents have suggested that highway improvements be made in the area to help facilitate pedestrian movement and questioned about how construction traffic would be managed. These matters have been considered in the outline application and conditions has been attached which requires the provision of off-site highway safety mitigation and details of contractors parking during the construction works be submitted for approval before commencement of development. These are attached as conditions 14 and 11 on the outline planning permission, respectively.

7.11.5 Parking - Policy 6 of the RNOTP states that an average maximum residential parking standard of 2 spaces per dwelling will apply for the plan area. In accordance with the requirements of this policy, some 375 parking spaces would be provided for the proposed development and this gives an average of 2.5 spaces per dwelling. The

Development Control Committee 67 of 132 Date printed 9 February 2011

proposed parking would take place in various forms, but with mainly off-road parking provided within the curtilage of the proposed dwellings, many, of which would have garages. Therefore, sufficient parking would be provided to serve the proposed development. The concerns of local residents about the impact of the proposed development on local parking are noted. However, given sufficient off-road and on- street parking would be available within the proposed development, it would be difficult to justify a refusal on planning permission on grounds of parking.

7.12 Flood Risk and Drainage

7.12.1 The application site lies within Flood Zone 1 and Flood Zone 1 is defined by PPS25 as having a low probability of flooding. Local concerns in relation to history of storm water flooding at the site and within the surrounding area are noted. However, these matters have been considered at the outline stage and a condition requiring the provision of foul water and service water installations to serve the proposed development has been imposed on the outline planning permission (condition 12).

7.12.2 Drainage matters are for consideration as part of the discharge of conditions. However, for member information, the Environment Agency advises that there are three options to be considered for the discharge of surface water for this site. These options include (1) connection to the watercourse, (2) connection to the sewer and (3) through the use of soakaways. The Environmental Agency has advised that the first two options would not be feasible, given that the closest brook (Willow Brook) is located approximately 200 metres away from the site and direct connection cannot be provided without going over third part land, and Anglian Water has confirmed that there are no public sewers within the vicinity of the site with available capacity. This leaves the option of the use of soakaways.

7.12.3 The developers have proposed to discharge surface water runoff from the private residential plots to a single private surface water soakaway located within the public open space and this soakaway will be maintained by a private management company. A supporting statement on drainage has been submitted with the application and this advises: “Surface water run off will be collected from each plot via a private surface water network. Where it is necessary for the network to cross public highway land to reach the soakaway, this will be done in an agreement with the highway authority via Section 50 licenses.”

7.12.4 As in any other development, it is the developer’s responsibility to ensure adequate drainage and sewerage systems are put into place. Before the development could commence, the developer would need to demonstrate to the Environment Agency, through appropriate assessment, that the proposed system of soakaways would provide adequate drainage for the site. Further negotiation on these matters would be undertaken as part of the discharge of conditions.

7.13 Impact on Wildlife and Local Wildlife Sites

7.13.1 The effect of the proposed development on wildlife and the nearby Local Wildlife Sites were considered at the outline stage and conditions have been imposed on the outline planning permission to require (1) the submission of a Landscape Management Plan and (2) a scheme of mitigation to prevent harm to adders, before commencement of development. These are attached to the outline planning permission as conditions 22 and 23. Therefore, these conditions would address the concerns raised by the Wildlife Trust and Natural England in paragraphs 6.8 and 6.9 of this report.

7.13.2 The existing farm building positioned at the front of the site would be demolished. Natural England has requested that conditions be imposed to require investigations be carried out to investigate the existing farm building for bats and that no on site clearance works be carried out during the bird breeding season. The agent has advised

Development Control Committee 68 of 132 Date printed 9 February 2011

that a bat survey would be carried as a matter off course and Charles Church’s ecologist would carry out this study. As no requirement has been imposed for a bat survey on the outline planning permission, it would be difficult for the council to impose this requirement at the reserved matters. However, as bats are protected by other legislation, a informative to remind the developer of the requirements would be sufficient in this instance. Furthermore, the condition suggested by Natural England to require that no site clearance works be carried out during the bird breeding season would not be necessary, as this is matter is also covered by other legislation.

7.14 Sustainable Construction and Energy Efficiency

7.14.1 Policy 14 of the NNCSS requires development to incorporate techniques of sustainable construction, energy efficiency and make provision for waste reduction and recycling, and water efficiency and recycling. No conditions regarding sustainable construction and energy efficiency have been placed on the outline planning permission, as the NNCSS was not adopted during the consideration of the outline planning application. The question of whether it would be possible for the council to include a condition of sustainable construction in the reserved matters was raised and the following legal opinion has been received: “The courts have held that there is power for local authorities to impose a condition on an outline planning permission for other matters, such as approval of materials. Such a matter is not a ‘reserved matter’ but it lies within the council’s inherent powers to impose reasonable conditions on a planning permission. The essential problem for the local planning authority is that an application for approval of reserved matters is not an application for planning permission. The grant of planning permission is the outline permission and it is not possible, in approving reserved matters, to go beyond the matters which were reserved for subsequent approval in the outline planning permission. There is therefore no power to introduce at this stage a further condition relating to sustainable construction and energy efficiency.”

7.15.2 Notwithstanding the above, the applicant has proposed the following sustainable measures:

• Dual flush toilets and spray taps would provided within the dwellings to minimise domestic water use; • Energy efficient lighting and energy efficiency appliances; • The majority of the houses have rear gardens to allow the natural drying of washing; • The timber used within the development would be sourced from sustainable sources; • The proposed dwellings would be built to exceed national guidance in relation to thermal efficiency; • The houses will utilise the council’s waste management evince for domestic garden waste, recycling; • The proposed dwellings are designed with room for the storage of bins within the curtilage and storage for bins adjacent to the highway on collection day.

8 Other issues

8.1 Archaeology – It would be unreasonable to introduce new matters regarding archaeology on this reserved matters application, as the principle of the development and any conditions regarding archaeology needs to have been considered at the outline stage.

8.2 EIA - The Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) (England) (Amendment) Regulations 2007 set out when an EIA is required. EIA would not be required for this development due to its scale and nature.

8.3 Electricity supply – E-on Central Networks has not objected to the development. As in any other development, it is the developer’s responsibility to ensure that adequate

Development Control Committee 69 of 132 Date printed 9 February 2011

infrastructure, including electricity supply, would be provided to serve the development. The parish council has commented that the village experiences frequent electricity interruptions. However, this is a matter to be brought to the attention of the local electricity supplier.

8.4 Concerns about the site providing opportunities for further development on the land to the north and the parish council’s concern about the creation of entry points from the site to the land at the rear – The turning heads and footpaths proposed towards the northern boundary of the site are required in order to provide sufficient access to the dwellings proposed at the rear of the site. No development is proposed on the land to the north in this planning application and the council would have to consider each application/proposal on their individual planning merits.

8.5 When would the play areas be completed and when will the cricket field be transferred to the parish council – These matters are set out in the S106 legal agreement. The play area is required to be designed and implemented within the first phase of the development and arrangements for transfer of the cricket field to the parish council is detailed in schedule 3.1.1.4 of the legal agreement.

8.6 What is the criteria for applying for the affordable homes – The S106 agreement stipulates that the affordable housing would be offered to people with a local connection with King’s Cliffe in the first instance, and then to those from the surrounding villages. The specific criteria for applying for the affordable homes is set by the RSL.

8.7 Augean development – Members will recall that an application for landfill disposal of low level radioactive waste at Slipe Clay Pit Landfill Site was submitted to the NCC and East Northamptonshire Council was consulted on this application. The issues were discussed at the Development Control Committee on 30.09.2009. This application was refused by the NCC and an appeal is currently being considered by The Planning Inspectorate. Notwithstanding the outcome of this application, the principle of residential development on this site has been established by the outline planning permission granted in EN/05/00620/OUT.

8.8 Access for disabled – Due to the rise in gradient of the land, the footpath proposed running north-south through the centre of the site is likely to cause some access issues for disable access users and those using pushchairs and prams. However, it is proposed that this footpath would be designed sensitive to its users through a series of steps and ramps; and notwithstanding the above concerns, the wider community benefits of providing this footpath connection would outweigh any resulting harm.

8.9 Public bins – A few of these would be provided adjacent to the access road on the open space area and next to the benches/seating areas proposed within the play areas. The issues raised by ENC Waste management about the provision of both litter and dog bins on the estate have been brought to the attention of the agent. Any further provisions, would be report in the committee updates.

8.10 Provision of fire hydrants – The recommendations of the Northamptonshire Fire and Rescue Service have bee brought to the attention of the agent. Again, details of any provisions would be reported in the committee updates.

8.11 Crime and disorder – This matter has been considered by Northamptonshire Police and the proposed development does not raise significant issues. In accordance with the recommendations of the Crime Prevention Officer, conditions are recommended to require the submission of lighting details and details of how the external doors and windows of the proposed dwellings would be kept secure, including details of any security standards.

Development Control Committee 70 of 132 Date printed 9 February 2011

9 Conclusion

9.1 In recommending approval to this application, the relevant planning guidance and policies were identified as: PPS1, PPS3, PPS5, PPS7, PPS9, PPG13, PPG17, PPS23, PPG24, PPS25; Policies 1, 2, 3, 13b, 17, 26, 27, 28, 29, 32, 35, 39, 40, 41, 43, 45, 46, 48 of the East Midlands Regional Plan 2009; Policy 3 of the MKSM Sub-Regional Strategy; Policies 1, 6, 7, 9, 10, 13, 14, 15 of the North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy 2008; Policies GEN3, H4, RL3, RL4 of the East Northamptonshire Local Plan 1996; Policies 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 15, KCF2 of the Rural North, Oundle and Thrapston Plan (Inspectors Report 2009); Supplementary Planning Guidance: SPG Planning Out Crime in Northamptonshire 2004, Rocking Forest Countryside Design Guide 2000; Design SPD 2009; Highway Authority Standing Advice for Planning Authorities, Working Draft July 2008; Northamptonshire Place and Movement Guide 2008; and Manual for Streets 2007.

Having regard to these, the representations received and any other material planning reasons, the main issues were identified as the principle of development; impact on local infrastructure; developer contributions; housing mix; visual impact; landscaping; effect on trees and hedges; effect on the setting of the conservation area; impact on neighbouring amenities; highway impact; flood risk and drainage; impact on wildlife and the Local Wildlife Sites; sustainable construction; access for the disabled; and crime and disorder.

The application has been recommended for approval as:

1. The principle of the development is acceptable and is consistent with the development plan and guidance contained in national planning policies. 2. There would be no adverse effect on infrastructure. 3. The developer contributions have been secured in the outline planning permission 4. The proposed housing mix is acceptable. 5. The proposal would not harm visual amenity or the character and appearance of the area. 6. The landscaping proposals are acceptable subject to some amendment required by condition. 7. The proposal would not result in an unacceptable loss or harm to trees and hedges. 8. The proposal would not harm the conservation area or its setting. 9. The proposal would not have a significant impact on the amenities of neighbouring occupiers or the amenity of the area. 10. The proposal would not have an unacceptable impact on the local highway. 11. There would be no significant flood risk issues. 12. The proposal would not have a significant impact on drainage. 13. The proposal would have no significant impact on wildlife and Local Wildlife Sites. 14. The sustainable construction and energy efficiency proposals are acceptable. 15. Waste and recycling storage can be reasonably provided for the dwellings. 16. The proposal would have no significant disabled access issues. 17. The proposal would have no significant crime and disorder issues. A full report is available on the Council’s website www.east-northamptonshire.gov.uk

10 Recommendation

10.1 That the application be GRANTED subject to the following conditions:

Conditions/Reasons -

1. In accordance with the submitted information, the windows and doors of the dwellings hereby approved shall be of timber construction. The external facing materials hereby approved are: Forticrete Shearstone Cottage Milbourne Olde Heather stone, Hanson Oakthorpe Red Stock and Hanson Oakthorpe Buff Stock. The external roofing materials hereby approved are: Forticrete Gemini Slate Grey, Forticrete Gemini Mixed Russet and Redland Norfolk Pantile Tudor Brown. The development shall be constructed in accordance with these materials and in accordance with the submitted materials layout

Development Control Committee 71 of 132 Date printed 9 February 2011

(drawing number: 105 Revision E, received by the local planning authority on 14 January 2011), unless otherwise agreed in writing by the local planning authority. Reason: To ensure a satisfactory elevational appearance for the development and to ensure that the development is carried out as permitted.

2. The dwellings hereby permitted shall be constructed in phases and full details of a phasing scheme shall be submitted to and be approved in writing by the local planning authority, prior to commencement of development. The development shall thereafter be implemented in accordance with the phasing scheme so approved, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the local planning authority. Reason: In the interest of residential amenity and visual amenity.

3. The Affordable Housing Scheme shall be implemented in accordance with the details submitted to the local planning authority on 6 September 2010, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the local planning authority. Reason: To ensure that the development is carried out as permitted.

4. Prior to the commencement of the development hereby permitted, drawings to show the design, colour and finish details of the ‘metal estate railings’ shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The development shall thereafter be implemented in accordance with the details so approved, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the local planning authority. Reason: To ensure a satisfactory elevational appearance for the development and in the interest of visual amenity.

5. Notwithstanding the group of trees proposed north of the LEAP and LAP areas, an alternative landscaping scheme shall be provided for this area and details of this scheme shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority, prior to commencement of development. Landscaping for this area shall thereafter be provided in accordance with the details so approved, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the local planning authority. Reason: To ensure a reasonable standard of development and to avoid detriment to the visual amenity of the area.

6. All planting, seeding and turfing comprised in the approved details of landscaping shall be carried out in the first planting season following the occupation of the building(s) or the completion of the development, whichever is the sooner. Any trees or plants which within a period of 5 years from the completion of the development die, are removed or become seriously damage or diseased, shall be replaced in the next planting season with others of a similar size and species, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the local planning authority. Reason: To ensure a reasonable standard of development and to avoid detriment to the visual amenity of the area.

7. Acoustic fencing shall be provided to the southern rear garden boundaries of plots 103, 104 and 105 and details shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority, prior to commencement of development. The acoustic fencing shall be provided in accordance with the details so approved and be thereafter retained, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the local planning authority. Reason: In the interest of the residential amenity of the future occupiers of the dwellings.

8. Details of a scheme of lighting for the development hereby approved, shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority, prior to the commencement of development. This shall include full details of the type of lighting, number, exact location and level and type of illumination. The scheme shall thereafter be implemented in accordance with the details so approved, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the local planning authority.

Development Control Committee 72 of 132 Date printed 9 February 2011

Reason: In the interest of preventing crime, anti-social behaviour and reducing the fear of crime, in accordance with Policy 13 of the adopted North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy and in the interest of residential amenity.

9. All external doors and windows on the ground floor, and easily accessible first floor, of the buildings hereby permitted shall be made secure to standards, and details of such standards shall be submitted and approved in writing by the local planning authority, prior to commencement of development. The development shall thereafter be implemented in accordance with the details so approved, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the local planning authority. Reason: In the interest of preventing crime, anti-social behaviour and reducing the fear of crime, in accordance with Policy 13 of the adopted North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy.

10. Notwithstanding the submitted details, a tree protection plan shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority prior to the commencement of development and shall be in accordance with BS5837:2005. The development shall thereafter be carried out in accordance with these details, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the local planning authority. Reason: To ensure the protection of trees on site and in the interest of visual amenity.

11. An arboricultural method statement shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority prior to the commencement of the development and this statement shall be in accordance with BS5837:2005. The development shall thereafter be carried out in accordance with these details, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the local planning authority. Reason: To ensure the protection of trees on site and in the interest of visual amenity.

12. The development hereby permitted shall be carried out strictly in accordance with the approved plans; amended plans received by the local planning authority on 14 January 2011, drawing numbers: 100 Revision 0, 105 Revision E, 106 Revision D, 107 Revision C, 109 Revision A, CD10-028-SK3 Revision B, CD10-028-SK2 Revision C, PER17397-11 Sheet 1, PER17397-11 Sheet 2, PER17397-11 Sheet 3, PER17397-11 Sheet 4, PER17397-11 Sheet 5; plans received on 6 January 2011, drawing numbers: Q2185-C Issue A dated 15.12.10, Q2185-C Issue C dated 15.12.10, Q2185-C Issue C dated 6.01.11; amended plans received 18 January 2011, drawing number: 104 - Revision A; plans received on 29 July 2010, drawing numbers: 2B4P-102, 136-1-102, 138-1-02, V142- 102, 1234S-1-102; and plans received on 8 July 2010, drawing numbers: 3B6P2.5-102, 3B5P-102, Burleigh-102-1, Forge-102, 136-102, 138-1-102, 142-1-102, 154-102, 1018- 102, 1024-102, 1972-102-2, 1972-102-1, V71 FOG-102, V626-102, V800-102, V978-102, VS978-102, VS1234-102, V1234-102, 1234-1-102, and location plan scale 1:2500. Reason: In order to clarify the terms of the planning permission and to ensure that the development is carried out as permitted.

Informatives

1. The additional information to which this decision relates are as follows: Information received by the local planning authority on 10 January 2011: play equipment photographs and illustrations, and play equipment product specifications; Design and Access Statement, and Buildings for Life Assessment received 25 November 2010; Proposed Surface Water System Statement, received 5 January 2011; ACD Landscape Specification, received 30 November 2010; and Transport Assessment.

2. In approving this application, the relevant planning guidance and policies were identified as: PPS1, PPS3, PPS5, PPS7, PPS9, PPG13, PPG17, PPS23, PPG24, PPS25; Policies 1, 2, 3, 13b, 17, 26, 27, 28, 29, 32, 35, 39, 40, 41, 43, 45, 46, 48 of the East Midlands Regional Plan 2009; Policy 3 of the MKSM Sub-Regional Strategy; Policies 1, 6, 7, 9, 10, 13, 14, 15 of the North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy 2008; Policies GEN3, H4,

Development Control Committee 73 of 132 Date printed 9 February 2011

RL3, RL4 of the East Northamptonshire Local Plan 1996; Policies 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 15, KCF2 of the Rural North, Oundle and Thrapston Plan (Inspectors Report 2009); Supplementary Planning Guidance: SPG Planning Out Crime in Northamptonshire 2004, Rocking Forest Countryside Design Guide 2000; Design SPD 2009; Highway Authority Standing Advice for Planning Authorities, Working Draft July 2008; Northamptonshire Place and Movement Guide 2008; and Manual for Streets 2007. Having regard to these, the representations received and any other material planning reasons, the main issues were identified as the principle of development; impact on local infrastructure; developer contributions; housing mix; visual impact; landscaping; effect on trees and hedges; effect on the setting of the conservation area; impact on neighbouring amenities; highway impact; flood risk and drainage; impact on wildlife and Local Wildlife Sites; sustainable construction; access for the disabled and crime and disorder.

The application has been approved as: 1. The principle of the development is acceptable and is consistent with the development plan and guidance contained in national planning policies.

2. There would be no adverse effect on infrastructure. 3. The developer contributions have been secured in the outline planning permission 4. The proposed housing mix is acceptable. 5. The proposal would not harm visual amenity or the character and appearance of the area. 6. The landscaping proposals are acceptable subject to some amendment required by condition. 7. The proposal would not result in an unacceptable loss or harm to trees and hedges. 8. The proposal would not harm the conservation area or its setting. 9. The proposal would not have a significant impact on the amenities of neighbouring occupiers or the amenity of the area. 10. The proposal would not have an unacceptable impact on the local highway. 11. There would be no significant flood risk issues. 12. The proposal would not have a significant impact on drainage. 13. The proposal would have no significant impact on wildlife and the Local Wildlife Sites. 14. The sustainable construction and energy efficiency proposals are acceptable. 15. Waste and recycling storage can be reasonably provided for the dwellings. 16. The proposal would have no significant disabled access issues. 17. The proposal would have no significant crime and disorder issues. A full report is available on the Council’s website www.east-northamptonshire.gov.uk

3. The applicant is advised that this planning permission does not absolve them from complying with the relevant law, including obtaining and complying with the terms and conditions of any licences required (i.e. as described in Part IV B of Circular 06/2005 in relation to bats and other protected species). Should bats be found in the existing barn building, the applicant is advised to cease works and to contact Natural England for advice.

Development Control Committee 74 of 132 Date printed 9 February 2011

Committee Report Committee Date : 9 February 2011 Printed: 27 January 2011

Case Officer Anna Lee EN/10/01500/FUL

Date received Date valid Overall Expiry Ward Parish 17 August 2010 19 August 2010 14 October 2010 Oundle Oundle

Applicant Mr And Mrs A Broughton

Agent CMPS

Location 63 Benefield Road Oundle Peterborough Northamptonshire PE8 4EU

Proposal Residential development of three houses and alterations to stone boundary wall

The application has been brought back to Development Control Committee after Members deferred the application on 19 January 2011 for a site visit.

------APPENDIX 1: Report to Development Control Committee, 19/01/2011 ------

The application has been brought to Development Control Committee as Oundle Town Council has objected on grounds of overlooking and due to concerns about the effect of the development on the stone wall facing Benefield Road. A separate application has been submitted for listed building consent EN/10/01501/LBC and both applications have been brought to committee together for consideration.

1 Summary of Recommendation

1.1 That permission be GRANTED subject to conditions.

2. The Proposal

2.1 The application proposes the construction of three, four bedroomed dwellings within the garden curlilage of no.63 Benefield Road, comprising of one detached dwelling (House 1) and a pair of semi-detached dwellings (Houses 2 and 3).

2.2 A shared access is proposed off Benefield Road to serve the three dwellings, in addition to nos.63 and 61 Benefield Road. Within the site, a detached double garage is proposed for House 1 and off-road parking is proposed to the sides of the semi-detached properties, Houses 2 and 3.

2.3 The application has been amended on 9 December 2010 to include minor changes to the design.

3 The Site and Surroundings

3.1 The application site is a ‘L’ shaped site, measuring approximately 0.18 hectares in

Development Control Committee 75 of 132 Date printed 9 February 2011 area. The site currently forms the rear garden curtilage of no.63 Benefield Road, a grade II listed, semi-detached stone cottage. The property benefits from a large garden to the rear, and nos.63 and 65 Benefield Road each have outbuildings located behind the property towards the north eastern side. The site is enclosed by a stone wall measuring approximately 1.8 metres in height and a wooden gate on the side facing Benefield Road.

3.2 The properties to the south along Benefield Road are traditional style terrace houses. The adjoining property no.65 Benefield Road and nos. 61 to 49 Benefield Road are all grade II listed. The site is not in a conservation area.

3.3 The site is surrounded by modern 1960/70s bungalows in Mildmay Close to the north and houses in Prince William Road to the northeast. There are also more modern properties on the south side of Benefield Road.

3.4 The bungalows in Mildmay Close are raised approximately 1.0 metres above the site and the land to the west is raised some 1.5-1.8 metres. The levels across the application site vary and slopes down gradually from the north to south direction towards Benefield Road.

4 Policy Considerations

4.1 National Planning Policy Guidance: PPS1– Sustainable Development PPS3 – Housing PPS5 – Planning for the Historic Environment PPS9 – Biodiversity and Geological Conservation PPG13 – Transport PPS25 – Planning and Flood Risk 4.2 East Midlands Regional Plan, March 2009 On 10th November 2010 the High Court ruled that the Secretary of State's decision to revoke Regional Spatial Strategies was unlawful as it had been taken without primary legislation. A statement was then issued by the Government reiterating their intention to remove RSSs and that this should be treated as a material consideration. However following further legal action the Secretary of State has now agreed that until the further court case in mid January it is for a Local Planning Authority to decide how much weight to attach to the letters that the Government have issued about Regional Spatial Strategies. Policy 1 – Regional Core Objectives Policy 2 – Promoting Better Design Policy 3 – Distribution of New Development Policy 27 – Regional Priorities for the Historic Environment Policy 45 – Regional Traffic Growth Reduction Policy 48 – Regional Car Parking Standards 4.3 North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy, June 2008: Policy 1 – Strengthening the Network of Settlements Policy 9 – Distribution & Location of Development Policy 10 – Distribution of Housing Policy 13 – General Sustainable Development Principles Policy 14 – Energy Efficiency and Sustainable Construction

4.4 Rural North, Oundle and Thrapston Plan (Emerging Policy): The Rural North Oundle and Thrapston Plan went through an examination process in 2008 and 2009. Following this examination on 8 July 2009 the Inspector found the document sound. However, as yet the Council has not adopted the Plan as a Development Plan Document as such the Council is still treating the document as emerging policy. Policy 1 – Settlement Roles Policy 2 – Windfall Development in Settlements

Development Control Committee 76 of 132 Date printed 9 February 2011

Policy 6 – Residential Parking Standards 4.5 Supplementary Planning Guidance: Parking SPG, March 2003 Planning Out Crime in Northamptonshire, Feb 2004 4.6 Supplementary Planning Document: Design SPD, March 2009 4.7 Other Documents: Highway Authority Standing Advice for Planning Authorities, Working Draft July 2008

5 Relevant Planning History

5.1 Five dwellings were proposed on the site under reference EN/10/00417/FUL and this application was refused under delegated powers on grounds of: (1) design; (2) the effect on the properties in Mildmay Close in terms of overlooking, overbearing and overshadowing; and (3) because the proposal would have an unacceptable impact on the character and setting of the main listed building of no.63 Benefield Road, due to the significant reduction in the garden size of the listed building and unacceptable alteration to the shape of its garden.

5.2 The above application was accompanied by listed building consent application reference EN/10/00418/LBC. This application proposed various alterations to the front boundary wall of no.63 Benefield Road to facilitate the provision of a shared access and also the creation of new boundary treatment to the side and rear of the listed building. This application was refused consent, because the proposed alterations were considered to result in significant separation of the rear garden of the listed building with the rest of its garden and would have an adverse effect on the character and setting of the listed building.

5.3 Both EN/10/00417/FUL and EN/10/00418/LBC were refused on 29.04.2010 and the current applications EN/10/01500/FUL and EN/10/01501/LBC are a resubmission.

6 Consultations and Representations

6.1 Neighbours: Seven letters of objection have been received from the occupants at no.75 Benefield Road, no.71 Benefield Road, no.67 Benefield Road, no.44 Benefield Road, no.3 Mildmay Close, no.5 Prince William Road and no.3 Prince William Road. Three letters with comments have been received from the occupants at no.73 Benefield Road, no.59 Benefield Road and no.52A Benefield Road. The reasons for objections/comments are summarised below:

• The proposed development appears contrary to the new government guidance which excludes gardens from development, “The development would amount to a small housing estate built on a moderate sized garden” • There would be an excessive number of houses built along Benefield Road; one local resident calculated that the total number of houses built would be 123 • “Planning applications seem to be judged on a one-off basis without taking into account the degradation caused by the cumulative effect of multiplicity of in-fill dwellings” • The proposed driveway would create an unattractive hammerhead • Insufficient parking on-site • The proposal would lead to parking overspill onto Benefield Road • Increase in traffic • Effect on highway safety, “Benefield Road is already congested with parking and is a dangerous road to park and walk along” • “Could the council please take a holistic look at the development of Benefield Road and the safety of car users and pedestrians? The existing development at Wakerley Close and Latham Park, plus the proposed development, would bring more families into the area and hence increase the need for a safe means of crossing the road in order to get to school and all other town amenities.” • An alternative access should be considered, “perhaps a better access to the site could

Development Control Committee 77 of 132 Date printed 9 February 2011

be found on the less busy Prince William Road” • Insufficient area for safe visibility splays at the access point • Overlooking and loss of privacy, in particular on the properties in Mildmay Close and Prince William Road • Houses 2 and 3 would overlook the private lane which accesses no.67 Benefield Road • Loss of light • Concerns about subsidence (occupant at no.3 Mildmay Close), “The bungalows on Mildmay Close will slip into the development unless a suitable retaining wall is constructed” • “The building of houses on this land has the potential to affect drainage/the water level and impact on the foundations of the surrounding properties” • Effect on the setting of the listed cottages • The development would not be in-keeping with the adjacent listed buildings • No attempt has been made to preserve the existing trees on site, “We are disappointed to have seen two mature trees felled the day before the previous applications”

In addition, one letter has been received from the occupants at no.61 Benefield Road in support of the application for the following reasons:

• The revised application addresses the issues raised in the previous unsuccessful application • The number of dwellings have been reduced from five down to three and the site would not be overdeveloped • The layout minimises the impact on the immediate neighbours • The proposed dwellings would not detract from the character of the area or the listed buildings • Private parking would be provided for each proposed dwelling and number 61 and 63 Benefield Road would be provided with off-road parking, “with the parking in Benefield Road becoming more problematic this can only be good news”

6.2 Oundle Town Council: objection, “due to the orientation of the house and the unsuitability of it overlooking adjoining properties, and due to concerns about the preservation of the stone wall”.

6.3 Local highway authority (NCC): no objection, subject to the NCC’s standard conditions for the construction of a vehicular access being met and that sight lines be provided to give visibility of at least 90 metres in both directions, from a point measured 4.5 metres back along the centre line of the proposed junction. The highway officer believes that the required visibility splays could be achieved within the scope of the development.

6.4 Northamptonshire County Council Archaeology: no objection, subject to conditions. Due to the history of the site and town, archaeological remains are likely to be present. However, this does not represent an over-riding constraint on the development, providing that adequate provision is made for the investigation and recording of any remains which may be affected.

6.5 Senior Conservation Officer: no objection.

6.6 Conservation Officer (Trees): no objection, subject to conditions (see section 7.8 below for recommendations).

6.7 Site notice posted: no other representations received.

7 Evaluation 7.1 The following issues are relevant to the determination of this application: 7.2 Principle of Development

7.2.1 The application site comprises garden land, which following an amendment to PPS3

Development Control Committee 78 of 132 Date printed 9 February 2011

(March 2010), is no longer classified as previously developed land. Local planning authorities, however, still need to take into account other material planning considerations in the determination of planning applications, including focusing housing development in suitable locations, accessibility to local services, public transport accessibility, the characteristics of the area and the desirability of using land efficiently, as advised by PPS3 (paragraphs 10,16, 26 and 46).

7.2.2 The application site lies within the settlement boundary of Oundle, as defined in the Rural North, Oundle and Thrapston Plan (RNOTP) and is served by existing local services and public transport facilities (albeit limited). The RNOTP identifies Oundle as a rural service centre with scope for windfall development within the settlement boundary, subject to the criteria set in Policy 2. Policy 2 states that planning permission will be granted for windfall development within settlement boundaries, providing the scale and siting of the dwellings accord with the character of the surroundings.

7.2.3 Some local residents have commented that “the development would amount to a small housing estate built on a moderate sized garden” and the proposed development, in addition to the other development allowed along Benefield Road, would result in too many houses being built in the area. However, officers feel that a proposal for three dwellings on a site area of 0.18 hectares would not be too cramped and would be acceptable providing it would not harm the character of the area. The council has to consider each application on its individual planning merits.

7.2.4 Therefore, the principle of residential development on this site is acceptable, subject to the issues set out below.

7.3 Visual Impact

7.3.1 The proposed dwellings would generally reflect the pattern and layout of the existing surrounding development. In particular, the proposed dwellings would follow the east/west facing orientation of the dwellings in Prince William Road; House 1 would be in-keeping with the detached layout of existing development to the north/northeast (at Milday Close and Prince William Road); and the semi-detached style of development of Houses 2 and 3 would be in-keeping with nos.65 and 63 Benefield Road whilst creating a transition towards the terraced style development further along Benefield Road.

7.3.2 In terms of the design, the site is surrounded by modern 60s/70s style of development to the north and east. The southern side of Benefield Road also accommodates modern style housing whilst the northern side is characterised by traditional style, two-storey terraced and semi-detached cottages. Most of these cottages have a simple pitched-roof form and flushed frontages, where the windows and doors are proportional and symmetrical.

7.3.3 The proposed dwellings would have pitched-roofs, chimneys, and simply composed front elevations. The design of the proposed dwellings would generally be in-keeping with the building form and styles of the properties in the surrounding area, and in particular, would appear harmonious with the properties along Benefield Road. The materials proposed for the construction of the dwellings are course limestone for the walls and natural grey slates for the roof. The window and door frames would be in timber and would have stone sills and lintels. These materials would be visually compatible with the existing cottages located at the front of the site and stone and slate are also common materials used on other developments along Benefield Road. The proposed materials would also create an acceptable contrast with the brown/buff bricks and concrete roof tiles used on the properties north of the site in Mildmay Close and Prince William Street. Full details and samples of the external materials would be submitted for approval prior to commencement of development.

7.3.4 Alterations are proposed to the front and side boundary walls of no.63 Benefield Road. The visual impact of these proposals on the street scene are discussed below in paragraph 7.4.4.

Development Control Committee 79 of 132 Date printed 9 February 2011

7.3.5 Some local residents have commented that the proposed driveway would create an unattractive hammerhead. Whilst a significant proportion of the driveway would be visible in the street scene, a mixture of hard and soft landscaping is proposed along the driveway. In particular, planting areas are proposed on both sides of the driveway in front of the proposed dwellings, and the submitted Design and Access Statement advises that “the driveway will be surfaced in a pea gravel to create a pleasant finish”. These proposals would create an attractive and user-friendly environment along the driveway and between the proposed dwellings. Conditions requiring the submission of the hard surfacing and landscaping details before commencement of development are recommended to ensure that there would be no visual harm from the proposed driveway.

7.4 Impact on Listed Buildings

7.4.1 The proposed dwellings would be positioned 18 metres from the rear of the main listed properties of nos. 65 and 63 Benefield Road and over 30 metres from the listed properties of nos. 61 to 49 Benefield Road. Therefore, the main listed houses would be sufficiently located away from the new buildings to not be adversely affected.

7.4.2 The proposal would not harm the two outbuildings located at the rear of nos.63 and 65 Benefield Road, as no works are proposed to these buildings themselves and each outbuilding would be retained for use by the listed building with which they are associated.

7.4.3 Whilst the proposal would alter the garden curtilage of no.63 Benefield Road by reducing its garden size and shape, no significant harm would result from these proposals. The proposed garden alterations would be sensitive to the setting of the listed building no.63 Benefield Road, as the new garden is designed level with the rear garden boundary of the adjoining listed building no.65 Benefield Road and the proposal would still provide the listed building no.63 Benefield Road with a good sized garden area measuring some 15 metres by 18 metres. Furthermore, the size of the proposed garden would be a sensible and proportionate size, still larger than the garden of the adjoining listed property and similar in size to the gardens of the other listed buildings along the street.

7.4.4 Oundle Town Council has raised concerns about the effect of the development on the stone wall. The stone wall facing Benefield Road measures approximately 1.8 metres in height and is constructed of limestone that has been extensively weathered. This wall decreases suddenly in height as the wall curves round in the east direction and appears to have been subjected to demolition. The application proposes to retain the existing stone wall and to build new stone walls on the east and northern boundaries to enclose the new garden proposed for no.63 Benefield Road. The new walls would match the existing stone wall in height and materials and the eastern wall, in particular, would form a continuation of the existing front boundary wall. A 45 degree ‘cut-off corner’ has been proposed at the point where the new wall adjoins the existing front boundary wall, in order to provide the pedestrian visibility splays requested by the local highway authority. Officers are content this would not have an adverse impact on the character and appearance of the listed building.

7.4.5 In the interest of preserving the character and setting of the surrounding listed buildings, a condition is recommended to require full details of the materials and stonework details to be submitted for approval before commencement of development. This condition would also ensure that there would be no harm on the street scene.

7.4.6 Overall, there would be no harm on the character, appearance or setting of no.63 Benefield Road or the other surrounding listed buildings.

7.5 Archaeology

7.5.1 The Archaeological Advisor advises: “The application site is located on the western side of Oundle and the north side of Benefield Road. Several listed buildings are recorded in

Development Control Committee 80 of 132 Date printed 9 February 2011 the vicinity, including no.63 Benefield Road itself. The buildings are predominantly cottages associated with the industrial expansion of the town, and the Extensive Urban Survey suggests that many would have had associated outbuildings and workshops which have since been demolished.” Therefore, the Archaeological Advisor considers that there is potential for remains of industrial activity to survive on the application site.

7.5.2 Policy HE8.1 of PPS5 stresses the importance of pre-application discussions in order to assess the significance of potential heritage assets and normally the assessment would take place in the form of a field evaluation prior to determination. However, the Archaeological Advisor considers that an archaeological investigation and watching programme condition would be acceptable in this instance, after taking into consideration the relevant archaeological background evidence.

7.5.3 In order to ensure that no archaeological remains would be adversely affected by the proposed development, the condition suggested by Northamptonshire Archaeology is recommended.

7.6 Neighbouring Amenity

7.6.1 The neighbouring properties closest to the proposed development are no.5 Prince William Road and nos. 3 and 4 Mildmay Close.

No.5 Prince William Road

7.6.2 A detached double garage is proposed adjacent to the boundary of the neighbouring property. Given this garage is single-storey in height, would be positioned on a ground level lower than the garden of the neighbouring property and would be mostly concealed by the existing 1.8 metre high boundary fence, there would be no overbearing or overshadowing impact from the garage.

7.6.3 House 1 would be positioned some 12 to 13 metres away from no.5 Prince William Road. Given this distance and due to the fact that the proposed dwelling would be positioned off-set from the neighbouring property and at a lower land level, there would be no overbearing or overshadowing impact on the neighbouring property or its rear garden. In the previous planning application EN/10/00417/FUL, a pair of semi-detached houses was proposed in the position of House 1 and the application was refused due to concerns of overbearing and overshadowing upon no.5 Prince William Road. In comparison with the two dwellings previously proposed, the detached dwelling proposed in this application (House 1), would be of a lesser depth and would be positioned further away from the neighbouring property.

7.6.4 Two windows are proposed in the north facing elevation of House 1 at the ground floor level (one to a living room and one to a dining room). However, as the ground floor of the proposed dwelling would be mostly concealed from the neighbouring property and garden by the existing boundary fence, there would be no overlooking from the proposed openings. No windows are proposed in the north elevation of House 1 at the first floor and, as such, there would be no undue overlooking on no.5 Prince William Road.

No.3 Mildmay Close

7.6.5 Again, the garage proposed for House 1 would be positioned offset from the neighbouring property and would be mostly concealed by the 1.8 metre high boundary fence. House 1 would be positioned 14 metres away and would have the side elevation facing the neighbouring property. It would be difficult to justify overbearing on the neighbouring property, given House 1 would not be directly in line with the rear windows of the neighbouring property and no.3 Mildmay Close is a bungalow with rear windows which are obstructed by its own rear boundary fence. The fact that the proposed dwellings are likely to be constructed on ground level(s) lower than the garden of the neighbouring property would

Development Control Committee 81 of 132 Date printed 9 February 2011 further reduce any overbearing or overshadowing impact.

7.6.6 In terms of overlooking, there would be no overlooking issues from the habitable room windows proposed on the ground floor at the front of House 1, as these would be concealed by the existing boundary fence. The two first floor windows closest to no.3 Mildmay Close are to a en-suite and bathroom. Therefore, providing these windows are conditioned to be obscured glazed, this would prevent overlooking on the neighbouring property.

7.6.7 Overall, in order to ensure that there would be no overlooking on the occupiers at No.5 William Road and no.3 Mildmay Close in the future, a condition to prevent any window openings being created in the first floor of the north elevation of House 1, is recommended.

No.4 Mildmay Close

7.6.8 A row of three terrace houses was proposed in the position of Houses 2 and 3 in the previous application (EN/10/00714/FUL) and concerns were raised about the impact of the proposed dwellings on nos. 4 and 5 Mildmay Close in terms of overbearing, overshadowing and overlooking. Houses 2 and 3 proposed in the current submission would be positioned further away from the northern boundary and the main dwelling of no.4 Mildmay Close, at respective distances of 11 metres and 13 metres. Given these distances and the fact that the proposed dwellings are likely to be constructed on lower ground level, there would be no undue overbearing or overshadowing impact on the main property or garden area of no.4 Mildmay Close. Furthermore, the existing boundary treatment i.e. the 1.8 high fencing and shrubs/bushes, which separate the application site from the neighbouring property, would help to safeguard the amenities of the neighbouring occupiers.

7.6.9 Windows to living accommodation areas were proposed on the north side of the terraced houses proposed in the previous application and these were considered to have an overlooking impact on the main property and garden area of no.4 Mildmay Close. As no windows are proposed in north side of House 2 at the first floor level in this current application, there would be no overlooking issues. In the interest of safeguarding the residential amenities of the occupiers in the neighbouring property, a condition to prevent new window openings being created in the north side of Houses 2 and 3, is also recommended.

Other properties, including no.3 Prince William Road and no.5 Mildmay Close

7.6.10 The proposed houses would be positioned approximately 20 metres from no.3 Prince William Road and some 25 metres from no.5 Mildmay Close. There would be no undue impact on these properties in terms of overbearing, overshadowing or overlooking, due to these distances. All other neighbouring properties would be sufficiently removed and, therefore, would not be adversely affected.

7.6.11 Providing the proposed dwellings are constructed on appropriate ground levels, this would help to prevent harm on the neighbouring properties and a condition requiring the submission of level details is recommended.

7.6.12 The applicant has not confirmed whether the fencing to the north, east and southern boundaries of the site would be retained. Therefore, in the interest of preserving the amenities of the occupiers of the existing and proposed dwellings, it is recommended that further boundary screening details be submitted before commencement of development.

7.6.13 A local resident has raised concerns about the impact of overlooking from Houses 2 and 3 on the private driveway which leads to no.67 Benefield Road. This driveway is located west of the application site and is situated on ground levels raised some 1.5 to 1.8 metres above the site. Hedgerows, shrubs and stone wall measuring approximately 600mm in height currently forms the boundary to the driveway. The proposal is to retain the existing boundary treatment and to repair and rebuild the existing stone wall. Whilst there is currently

Development Control Committee 82 of 132 Date printed 9 February 2011 insufficient information to suggest whether this would provide sufficient screening for the proposed development, the requested boundary screening and level conditions (listed as conditions 3 and 5) would help to ensure that suitable treatment is provided along this boundary.

7.6.14 Overall, there would be no undue harm on no.69 and 67 Benefield Road in terms of overlooking, overshadowing or overbearing, as these properties are positioned on higher ground level and the front gardens of the properties are relatively screened away.

7.6.15 Some local residents have questioned about the measures that would be put into place along the northern boundary to prevent land slipping from Mildmay Close to the site and have suggested that retaining walls be installed. The existing 1.8 metre high closed boarded fence also sits on a dwarf wall and these structures currently retain the ground soil within the boundaries of the properties in Mildmay Close. However, should further boundary treatment and/or retaining walls be required in order to ensure that safe and usable gardens would be created for the proposed dwellings, conditions 3 and the levels condition would ensure that appropriate boundary screening is provided along this boundary.

7.6.16 Overall, the impact on neighbouring amenities is insufficient to justify a refusal of planning permission on this application.

7.7 Highway Impact

7.7.1 The proposed access width of 4.5 metres for the first 10 metres back from the highway boundary meets the NCC’s requirements for a shared access. Providing conditions are attached to ensure that the proposed access is constructed to the meet the other NCC’s standards, the local highway authority does not object to the development. These conditions include (1) the provision of hard surfacing for the first 5.0 metres of the access; (2) provision of a maximum 1 in 15 gradient; (3) provision of adequate surface water drainage; and (4) provision of pedestrian visibility splays measuring 2.0 metres x 2.0 metres on both sides of the access. In addition, the highway officer has requested that vehicular visibility splays be provided on both sides of the access to give visibility of at least 90 metres in both directions (from a point measured 4.5 metres back along the centre line of the proposed junction).

7.7.2 Policy 6 of the RNOTP states that an average maximum residential parking standard of 2 spaces per dwelling will apply for the plan area. The application proposes at least two off- road parking spaces for each of the proposed dwellings and the parking spaces shown for each of the dwellings would also appear workable.

7.7.3 The application also proposes to provide two off-road parking spaces for the principle dwelling no.63 Benefield Road and the neighbouring dwelling to the east (no.61 Benefield Road). Given these existing dwellings do not currently benefit from off-road parking, the proposal would help to alleviate some of the on-street parking in the area. Overall, the proposal meets the parking standards set out in Policy 6 and sufficient off-road parking would be provided to serve the proposed development.

7.7.4 Some local residents have expressed concerns that the proposed development would lead to an overspill of parking onto Benefield Road. However, this is unlikely to be an issue, as sufficient off-road parking would be provided to serve the proposed dwellings.

7.7.5 A local resident has suggested that an alternative access be created into the site. Notwithstanding this suggestion, the council can only consider the access arrangements proposed in the current submission and in light of its individual planning merits. It would appear that the creation of an access off Benefield Road would be the more feasible option due to the topography of the surrounding land. The proposed access would also make use of the existing vehicular crossing located at the front of no.63 Benefield Road.

7.7.6 Some residents have requested that highway improvements be made along Benefield

Development Control Committee 83 of 132 Date printed 9 February 2011

Road i.e. in the form of an improved crossing, in order to help residents get to school and all other town amenities. However, as the number of dwellings proposed, and the size of the site, falls below the threshold set out in our SPD in respect of developer contributions, it would be unreasonable to request for these improvements.

7.7.7 In conclusion, there are unlikely to be significant highway safety issues from this development. All the parking and highway safety concerns raised by the surrounding occupants have been noted. However, given the submitted access details would satisfy the highway requirements adopted by the NCC and the NCC has not objected to the proposed development, the application would be difficult to refuse on grounds of highway safety.

7.8 Impact on Trees

7.8.1 Whilst the application forms indicate that there are no trees or hedges on or adjacent to the site, the Tree Officer notes that some of the larger trees on the site have been recently felled and there are some smaller trees which abut the site (located within the neighbouring properties) that are still present and have not been taken into consideration in the planning application. Should the council be minded to grant planning permission, conditions should be used to request various arboricultural documentation and strategies, including a Tree Protection Plan and Arboricultural Method Statement, to ensure that the neighbouring trees would not be adversely affected by the development during the construction phase.

7.8.2 Overall, there are no matters relating to trees on this application that could not be dealt with by conditions.

7.9 Sustainable Construction and Energy Efficiency

7.9.1 Policy 14 (i), (ii) and (iii) of the Core Spatial Strategy states that development shall incorporate techniques of sustainable construction, provision for waste reduction/recycling, and water efficiency/recycling. The submitted Sustainability and Energy Statement advises that the proposed dwellings would be built to building regulation standards, and “the dwellings have flues for wood burning stoves. Other features may include heat pumps and under-floor heating”. Due to the limited information provided on how the proposed development would satisfy the requirements of this policy, a condition to require the submission of further details before commencement of development is recommended.

7.10 Flood Risk and Drainage

7.10.1 Whilst the concerns of local residents in respect of flood/drainage have been noted, the application site is not identified as having a significant flood risk according to the Environment Agency Maps and does not lie within Flood Zone 2 or 3. As in any other development, it is the developer’s responsibility to ensure adequate drainage and sewerage systems are put into place. However, in the interest of residential amenity and to safeguard public health, a condition to require the submission of drainage details to the local planning authority before commencement of development is recommended.

8 Other issues

8.1 Waste and recycling storage – There would be sufficient room for waste and recycling storage within the gardens of the proposed and existing dwellings. Therefore, this application does not raise any significant issues.

8.2 Subsidence and impact on the foundations of the surrounding neighbouring properties - This is a matter raised by some of the neighbouring occupants. This is a civil matter covered by other legislation.

8.3 Withdrawal of permitted development rights - In order to ensure that the proposed dwellings would not be unacceptably altered in the future, in the interest of preserving the

Development Control Committee 84 of 132 Date printed 9 February 2011 character and setting of the surrounding listed buildings and to safeguard the residential amenity of the neighbouring occupiers, it is recommended that class A, B, C, D, E and F permitted development rights (relating to extensions, roof alterations, porches, outbuildings and hard surface treatment) be withdrawn from the proposed dwellings.

8.4 Crime and disorder – Providing appropriate boundary treatments are provided for the proposed and existing dwellings to keep the gardens secure, this application does not raise any significant issues.

9 Conclusion

9.1 In recommending approval to this application, the relevant planning guidance and policies were identified as: PPS1, PPS3, PPS5, PPS9, PPG13, PPS25; Policies 1, 2, 3, 27, 45 and 48 of the East Midlands Regional Plan; Policies 1, 9, 10, 13, 14 of the North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy 2008; Policies 1, 2 and 6 of the Rural North, Oundle and Thrapston Plan (Emerging Policy); Supplementary Planning Guidance: Parking SPG 2003, SPG Planning Out Crime in Northamptonshire 2004; Design SPD 2009; and Highway Authority Standing Advice for Planning Authorities, Working Draft July 2008.

Having regard to these, the representations received and any other material planning reasons, the main issues were identified as the principle of development; visual impact; impact on listed buildings; impact on archaeology; impact on neighbouring amenities; highway impact; impact on trees; sustainable construction; flood risk and drainage; and crime and disorder.

The application has been recommended approval as:

1. The principle of the development is acceptable and is consistent with the development plan and guidance contained in national and regional planning policies. 2. The proposal would have no significant impacts on visual amenity or the character and appearance of the area. 3. The proposal would not harm the surrounding listed buildings, including their setting, character and appearance. 4. The proposal is unlikely to have an adverse effect on archaeology. 5. The proposal would not have a significant impact on the amenities of neighbouring occupiers or the amenity of the area. 6. The proposal would not have an unacceptable impact on the local highway. 7. The proposal would not result in an unacceptable loss or harm to trees. 8. There would be no significant flood risk issues and the proposal would not have a significant impact on drainage. 9. The proposal meets the sustainable construction and energy efficiency standards. 10. Waste and recycling storage can be reasonably provided for the dwellings 11. The proposal would have no significant crime and disorder issues.

10 Recommendation

10.1 That the application be GRANTED subject to the following conditions:

11 Conditions/Reasons -

1. The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of 3 years from the date of this permission. Reason: Statutory requirement under provision of Section 51 of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004.

2. The development shall be constructed in accordance with the materials stated in the

Development Control Committee 85 of 132 Date printed 9 February 2011

submitted Design and Access Statement received by the local planning authority on 19 August 2010, including limestone for the walls and dark grey slates for the roof, and the windows and doors shall all be in timber. Prior to commencement of development, full details and samples of the external materials to be used for the construction of the dwellings and garage of House 1, and the colour and finish details of all windows and doors shall have been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The development shall thereafter be implemented in accordance with the details so approved, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the local planning authority.

Reason: To achieve a satisfactory appearance for the development and to ensure the development would not harm the character and setting of the surrounding listed buildings.

3. Prior to the commencement of the development hereby permitted, details of the provision of screening to all boundaries of the site shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. This shall include (i) details indicating the positions, height, design, materials and type of boundary treatment to be erected, and (ii) elevation and sectional details to show the relationship of the boundary treatments proposed for the north, west and eastern boundaries of site with the land within 5 metres of the proposed boundary treatment. This boundary screening shall then be provided in accordance with the details so approved before the building is occupied and shall thereafter be retained in perpetuity, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the local planning authority. Reason: To ensure adequate standards of privacy for neighbours and occupiers and to safeguard the amenity of the area.

4. In accordance with the details shown on drawing number: 10.01/04A received by the local planning authority on 9 December 2010, the existing front boundary wall attached to the east side of no.63 Benefield Road shall be retained. The boundary walls proposed along the south and eastern sides of no.63 Benefield Road shall be constructed using natural stone, and before any work is commenced on the development hereby permitted, details and samples of the proposed facing materials for the wall, together with mortar and stonework details, shall 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 achieve a satisfactory appearance for the development and to ensure the development would not harm the character and setting of the listed buildings.

5. Before any work is commenced on the development hereby permitted, details showing the slab levels of the buildings in relation to the existing and proposed levels of the site and the surrounding land and buildings within 5 metres of the site (including the ridge heights and eaves height of neighbouring buildings of nos. 3, 4 and 5 Mildmay Close, no.63 Benefield Road, and nos.3 and 5 Prince William Road) shall be submitted and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The buildings shall thereafter be constructed in accordance with the details so approved, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the local planning authority. Reason: For the avoidance of doubt and to ensure a satisfactory form of development in relation to neighbouring land and buildings.

6. Notwithstanding the submitted details, pedestrian visibility splays of 2.0 m x 2.0 m and vehicular visibility splays of 90 m (from a point measured 4.5 metres back along the centre line of the proposed junction) shall be provided on both sides of the vehicular access. The areas of land between the required sight lines and the highway carriageway shall be cleared, levelled and retained at a height not exceeding 0.6 metres above the carriageway and driveway levels. Reason: In the interest of highway safety.

7. The vehicular access shall have a gradient not exceeding 1 in 15 for a distance of 5.0 metres back from the correct level at the highway boundary. Prior to the first occupation of

Development Control Committee 86 of 132 Date printed 9 February 2011

the development hereby permitted this area shall be paved with a hard bound surface for a minimum of 5.0 metres back from the highway boundary and be thereafter retained. Reason: In the interest of highway safety.

8. Before the development hereby permitted is commenced, details of the construction and surfacing of the vehicular access to the public highway, parking facilities and all other hard-surfaced areas within the site shall have been submitted to and approved by the local planning authority. These facilities shall then be provided in accordance with the approved details before the first occupation of the development, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the local planning authority. Reason: In the interest of highway safety, visual amenity and to ensure the development would not harm the character and setting of the surrounding listed buildings.

9. Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and County Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 2008 (or any Order amending or re-enacting that Order with or without modification), no gates or other form of barrier shall be erected at the point of access. Reason: In the interest of highway safety and to ensure the development would not harm the character and setting of the surrounding listed buildings.

10. Adequate surface water drainage system shall be provided to prevent the unregulated discharge of water onto the highway boundary and these measures shall be implemented before the development is brought into use. Reason: In the interest of highway safety.

11. No development shall take place until there has been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority a comprehensive scheme of landscaping for the site, which shall be implemented strictly in accordance with the approved details in the first planting season following the occupation of the development, unless otherwise agreed in writing with the local planning authority. In accordance with the submitted drawings, this shall include planting proposals on both sides of the driveway, in front of the dwellings hereby approved. Reason: To ensure a reasonable standard of development and to avoid detriment to the visual amenity of the area.

12. All planting, seeding and turfing comprised in the approved details of landscaping shall be carried out in the first planting season following the occupation of the building(s) or the completion of the development, whichever is the sooner. Any trees or plants which within a period of 5 years from the completion of the development die, are removed or become seriously damage or diseased, shall be replaced in the next planting season with others of a similar size and species, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the local planning authority. Reason: To ensure a reasonable standard of development and to avoid detriment to the visual amenity of the area.

13. An arboricultural method statement shall be submitted to and be approved in writing by the local planning authority prior to the commencement of the development. This statement shall be in accordance with BS5837:2005. The development shall thereafter be carried out in accordance with these details, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the local planning authority. Reason: To ensure the protection of trees on site and on the adjacent sites, in the interest of visual amenity.

14. Notwithstanding the submitted details, a tree protection plan for onsite trees and hedges and those within 5 metres adjacent to the site shall be submitted to and be approved in writing by the local planning authority prior to the commencement of development and shall be in accordance with BS5837:2005. The development shall thereafter be carried out in accordance with these details, unless otherwise agreed in

Development Control Committee 87 of 132 Date printed 9 February 2011

writing by the local planning authority. Reason: To ensure the protection of trees on site and in the interest of visual amenity.

15. No development shall take place until the applicant, or their agents or successors in title, has secured the implementation of a programme of archaeological work in accordance with a written scheme of investigation and recording which has been submitted by the applicant and approved in writing by the local planning authority. Archaeological investigation and recording shall thereafter be carried out in the accordance with the approved scheme, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the local planning authority. Reason: To ensure that features of archaeological interest are properly examined and recorded, in accordance with PPS5.

16. Before any work is commenced on the development the subject of this permission, details of the provision of foul water and surface water drainage installations to serve the development shall have been submitted to and be approved by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall thereafter be implemented in accordance with the approved details before the development is brought into use, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To safeguard public health, in the interest of residential amenity and in the interest of highway safety.

17. Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 2008 (or any order revoking and re-enacting that Order), no windows or other form of opening, other than that shown on the plans hereby approved, shall be inserted at the first floor level in the north facing elevations of House 1 and House 2 hereby permitted. Reason: To ensure adequate standards of privacy for neighbours and occupiers.

18. Before House 1 hereby permitted is first brought into occupation, the first floor en-suite and bathroom window in the west facing elevation shall be fitted with obscured glazing to a minimum level of obscurity to conform to Pilkington Glass level 3 or equivalent, and this obscure glazing shall thereafter be retained permanently. Reason: To ensure adequate standards of privacy for neighbours and occupiers.

19. Before Houses 2 and 3 hereby permitted are first brought into occupation, the first floor en-suite and bathroom windows in the west facing elevations shall be fitted with obscured glazing to a minimum level of obscurity to conform to Pilkington Glass level 3 or equivalent, and this obscure glazing shall thereafter be retained permanently. Reason: To ensure adequate standards of privacy for neighbours and occupiers and to safeguard the general amenity of the area.

20. Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 2008 (or any Order amending or re-enacting that Order with or without modification), there shall be no development within Classes A, B, C, D, E or F of Part 1 of Schedule 2 to that Order. Reason: To ensure a satisfactory elevational appearance for the development, to protect the amenity of adjacent occupiers and to ensure the development would not harm the character and setting of the surrounding listed buildings.

21. Prior to the commencement of development hereby permitted, details of provisions for waste reduction and recycling, water efficiency and recycling and techniques of sustainable construction to be used for the construction of the building(s) hereby permitted, shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The development shall thereafter be implemented in accordance with the approved details, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the local planning authority. Reason: To ensure that the development is sustainable in accordance with national government advice contained in PPS1 and Policy 14 of the adopted North

Development Control Committee 88 of 132 Date printed 9 February 2011

Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy.

22. The development hereby permitted shall be carried out strictly in accordance with the approved plans; amended plans received by the local planning authority on 9 December 2010, drawing numbers:10.01/03A, 10.01/04A, 10.01/SP3, and location plan number: 10.01/LP1 received on 17 August 2010. Reason: In order to clarify the terms of the planning permission and to ensure that the development is carried out as permitted.

Informatives

1. The additional information to which this decision relates are as follows: Topographical survey drawing number 248/001 received by the local planning authority on 17 August 2010 and Design and Access Statement received on 19 August 2010.

2. In approving this application, the relevant planning guidance and policies were identified as: PPS1, PPS3, PPS5, PPS9, PPG13, PPS25; Policies 1, 2, 3, 27, 45 and 48 of the East Midlands Regional Plan; Policies 1, 9, 10, 13, 14 of the North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy 2008; Policies 1, 2 and 6 of the Rural North, Oundle and Thrapston Plan (Emerging Policy); Supplementary Planning Guidance: Parking SPG 2003, SPG Planning Out Crime in Northamptonshire 2004; Design SPD 2009; and Highway Authority Standing Advice for Planning Authorities, Working Draft July 2008. Having regard to these, the representations received and any other material planning reasons, the main issues were identified as the principle of development; visual impact; impact on listed buildings; impact on archaeology; impact on neighbouring amenities; highway impact; impact on trees; sustainable construction; flood risk and drainage; and crime and disorder. The application has been approved as: 1. The principle of the development is acceptable and is consistent with the development plan and guidance contained in national and regional planning policies. 2. The proposal would have no significant impacts on visual amenity or the character and appearance of the area. 3. The proposal would not harm the surrounding listed buildings, including their setting, character and appearance. 4. The proposal is unlikely to have an adverse effect on archaeology. 5. The proposal would not have a significant impact on the amenities of neighbouring occupiers or the amenity of the area. 6. The proposal would not have an unacceptable impact on the local highway. 7. The proposal would not result in an unacceptable loss or harm to trees. 8. There would be no significant flood risk issues and the proposal would not have a significant impact on drainage. 9. The proposal meets the sustainable construction and energy efficiency standards. 10. Waste and recycling storage can be reasonably provided for the dwellings 11. The proposal would have no significant crime and disorder issues.

A full report is available on the Council’s website www.east-northamptonshire.gov.uk

Development Control Committee 89 of 132 Date printed 9 February 2011

Committee Report Committee Date : 9 February 2011 Printed: 27 January 2011

Case Officer Anna Lee EN/10/01501/LBC

Date received Date valid Overall Expiry Ward Parish 17 August 2010 19 August 2010 14 October 2010 Oundle Oundle

Applicant Mr And Mrs A Broughton

Agent CMPS

Location 63 Benefield Road Oundle Peterborough Northamptonshire PE8 4EU

Proposal Residential development of three houses and alterations to stone boundary wall

The application has been brought back to Development Control Committee after Members deferred the application on 19 January 2011 for a site visit.

------APPENDIX 1: Report to Development Control Committee, 19/01/2011 ------

The application accompanies EN/10/01500/FUL and has been brought to Development Control Committee for consideration as Oundle Town Council has objected due to concerns about the effect of the development on the stone wall facing Benefield Road.

1 Summary of Recommendation

1.1 That listed building consent be GRANTED subject to conditions.

2. The Proposal

2.1 The application has been submitted to facilitate the provision of a shared access drive and three new dwellings at the rear of the property, which are subjected to a separate planning application, reference EN/10/01500/FUL.

2.2 The application proposes to retain the existing 1.8 metre high stone wall positioned along the front boundary and to build new stone walls on the east and northern boundaries to enclose the new garden proposed for no.63 Benefield Road. At the point where the new wall adjoins the existing front boundary wall, a 45 degree ‘cut off corner’ has been proposed, in order to provide the pedestrian visibility splays requested by the local planning authority.

3 The Site and Surroundings

3.1 The property benefits from a large garden to the rear, and nos.63 and 65 Benefield Road each have outbuildings located behind the property towards the north eastern side. The site is enclosed by a stone wall measuring approximately 1.8 metres in height and a wooden gate on the side facing Benefield Road.

Development Control Committee 90 of 132 Date printed 9 February 2011

3.2 The properties to the south along Benefield Road are traditional style terrace houses. The adjoining property no.65 Benefield Road and nos. 61 to 49 Benefield Road are all grade II listed.

4 Policy Considerations

4.1 National Planning Policy Guidance: PPS1– Sustainable Development PPS5 – Planning for the Historic Environment

4.2 East Midlands Regional Plan, March 2009 On 10th November 2010 the High Court ruled that the Secretary of State's decision to revoke Regional Spatial Strategies was unlawful as it had been taken without primary legislation. A statement was then issued by the Government reiterating their intention to remove RSSs and that this should be treated as a material consideration. However following further legal action the Secretary of State has now agreed that until the further court case in mid January it is for a Local Planning Authority to decide how much weight to attach to the letters that the Government have issued about Regional Spatial Strategies. Policy 2 – Promoting Better Design Policy 27 – Regional Priorities for the Historic Environment

4.3 North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy, June 2008: Policy 13 – General Sustainable Development Principles

4.4 Rural North, Oundle and Thrapston Plan (Emerging Policy): The Rural North Oundle and Thrapston Plan went through an examination process in 2008 and 2009. Following this examination on 8 July 2009 the Inspector found the document sound. However, as yet the Council has not adopted the Plan as a Development Plan Document as such the Council is still treating the document as emerging policy.

4.5 Supplementary Planning Document: Design SPD, March 2009

5 Relevant Planning History

5.1 EN/10/00418/LBC - This application proposed various alterations to the front boundary wall of no.63 Benefield Road to facilitate the provision of a shared access and also the creation of new boundary treatment to the side and rear of the listed building. This application was refused consent on 29.04.2010, because the proposed alterations were considered to result in significant separation of the rear garden of the listed building with the rest of its garden and would have an adverse effect on the character and setting of the listed building.

Development Control Committee 91 of 132 Date printed 9 February 2011

6 Consultations and Representations

6.1 Neighbours: the council would not normally carry out consultations on listed building consent application.

6.2 Oundle Town Council: objection, “due to the orientation of the house and the unsuitability of it overlooking adjoining properties, and due to concerns about the preservation of the stone wall”.

6.3 Northamptonshire County Council Archaeology: no objection, subject to conditions. Due to the history of the site and town, archaeological remains are likely to be present. However, this does not represent an over-riding constraint on the development, providing that adequate provision is made for the investigation and recording of any remains which may be affected.

6.4 Senior Conservation Officer: no objection.

7 Evaluation

7.1 The main consideration is the impact of the proposed development on the character, appearance, setting and historic fabric of no.63 Benefield Road, in addition to the other surrounding listed buildings.

7.2 Whilst the proposal would alter the garden curtilage of no.63 Benefield Road by reducing its garden size and shape, no significant harm would result from these proposals. The proposed garden alterations would be sensitive to the setting of the listed building no.63 Benefield Road, as the new garden is designed level with the rear garden boundary of the adjoining listed building no.65 Benefield Road and the proposal would still provide the listed building no.63 Benefield Road with a good sized garden area measuring some 15 metres by 18 metres. Furthermore, the size of the proposed garden would be a sensible and proportionate size, still larger than the garden of the adjoining listed property and similar in size to the gardens of the other listed buildings along the street.

7.3 The stone wall facing Benefield Road measures approximately 1.8 metres in height and is made up of limestone that has been extensively weathered. This wall decreases suddenly in height as the wall curves round in the east direction and appears to have been subjected to demolition. The proposed new walls would match the existing stone wall in height and materials. The eastern wall, in particular, would form a continuation of the existing front boundary wall. Officers are content that the proposed 45 ‘cut off corner’ would not have an adverse effect on the character and appearance of the listed property.

7.4 The proposal would not harm the two outbuildings located at the rear of nos.63 and 65 Benefield Road. All other listed properties would be sufficiently located away and would not be adversely affected by the proposals.

7.5 In the interest of preserving the character and setting of the surrounding listed buildings, a condition is recommended to require full details of the materials and stonework be submitted for approval before commencement of development. This condition would help to ensure that the proposals would not harm the character, setting and historic fabric of the listed wall and the surrounding listed buildings.

Development Control Committee 92 of 132 Date printed 9 February 2011

8 Other issues

8.1 Archaeology – An archaeological investigation and watching programme condition would not be required for this listed building consent application, due the nature and limited extent of works proposed in this application. Furthermore, this is a planning matter and has been considered in EN/10/01500/FUL.

9 Conclusion

9.1 In recommending approval to this application, the relevant planning guidance and policies were identified as: PPS1, PPS5; Policies 2 and 27 of the East Midlands Regional Plan 2009; Policy 13 of the North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy 2008; the Rural North, Oundle and Thrapston Plan (Emerging Policy); and Design SPD 2009.

Having regard to these, the representations received and any other material planning reasons, the main issues were identified as the impact on the character, appearance, setting and historic fabric of the listed buildings.

The application has been for approval as: 1. The proposed works would not harm the character, appearance or setting of the listed building. 2. The development would not result in the loss of historic fabric. 3.The proposed development makes use of materials appropriate to the listed building.

10 Recommendation

10.1 That the application be GRANTED subject to the following conditions:

Conditions/Reasons -

1. The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of 3 years from the date of this permission. Reason: Statutory requirement under provision of Section 51 of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004.

2. In accordance with the details shown on drawing number: 10.01/04A received by the local planning authority on 9 December 2010, the existing front boundary wall attached to the east side of no.63 Benefield Road shall be retained. The boundary walls proposed along the south and eastern sides of no.63 Benefield Road shall be constructed using natural stone, and before any work is commenced on the development hereby permitted, details and samples of the proposed facing materials for the wall, together with mortar and stonework details, shall 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 achieve a satisfactory appearance for the development and to ensure the development would not harm the character and setting of the listed buildings.

Development Control Committee 93 of 132 Date printed 9 February 2011

3. All disturbed surfaces shall be made good to match the existing. Reason: To achieve a satisfactory elevational appearance for the development and in order to maintain the character and appearance of the property as a building of acknowledged architectural and historic interest.

4. The development hereby permitted shall be carried out strictly in accordance with the approved plans; amended plans received by the local planning authority on 9 December 2010, drawing numbers: 10.01/04A and location plan number: 10.01/LP1 received on 17 August 2010. Reason: In order to clarify the terms of the planning permission and to ensure that the development is carried out as permitted.

Informatives

1. The additional information to which this decision relates are as follows:

Drawing numbers: 10.01/SP3 and 10.01/03A received by the local planning authority on 9 December 2010; Topographical survey drawing number 248/001 received on 17 August 2010, and Design and Access Statement received on 19 August 2010.

2. In approving this application, the relevant planning guidance and policies were identified as: PPS1, PPS5; Policies 2 and 27 of the East Midlands Regional Plan 2009; Policy 13 of the North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy 2008; the Rural North, Oundle and Thrapston Plan (Emerging Policy); and Design SPD 2009. Having regard to these, the representations received and any other material planning reasons, the main issues were identified as the impact on the character, appearance, setting and historic fabric of the listed buildings. The application has been approved as:

1. The proposed works would not harm the character, appearance or setting of the listed building. 2. The development would not result in the loss of historic fabric. 3. The proposed development makes use of materials appropriate to the listed building.

Development Control Committee 94 of 132 Date printed 9 February 2011

Development Control Committee 95 of 132 Date printed 9 February 2011

Committee Report Committee Date : 9 February 2011

Printed: 28 January 2011

Case Officer Samantha Hammonds EN/10/01551/FUL

Date received Date valid Overall Expiry Ward Parish 23 August 2010 16 November 2010 11 January 2011 Oundle Oundle

Applicant Bulldog Pub Company Ltd

Agent Horsley Townsend Architects Ltd - Mr G Townsend

Location The Talbot Hotel 7 New Street Oundle Peterborough Northamptonshire PE8 4EA

Proposal Replacement of existing single storey restaurant extension with smaller single storey restaurant extension, glazed screens to enclose existing entrance archway, opening up of original doorway within entrance archway, engineering works to create new steps from proposed restaurant area to enclosed garden, alterations to fenestration to ground floor staff facilities to create new restaurant area facing enclosed garden, rendering of north elevation facing enclosed garden, alterations to doorways and windows following removal of single storey extension to south elevation and replacement of window with door and window to north elevation of courtyard adjacent to archway

1 Summary of recommendation 1.1 That the application be GRANTED subject to conditions.

2. The proposal 2.1 The overall proposal is to make an extensive range of alterations to The Talbot Hotel with a view to improving circulation within and around the hotel and making the general layout more practical and user-friendly for both staff and customers. The aim is also to improve the physical appearance of the building both internally and externally by reinstating and emphasising historic features that have been lost, overshadowed or confused by previous alterations. The guest bedrooms would reduce in number but would be made larger and a level access bedroom suite would be created. 2.2 This full planning application (10/01551/FUL) covers only those elements of the overall scheme that require planning permission, namely: • Replacement of existing single storey restaurant extension with a smaller single storey restaurant extension • Alterations to newly exposed doorways and windows facing the courtyard • Glazed screens to enclose the rear extent of the entrance archway • Opening up an original doorway within the entrance archway • Replacement of window with door to north elevation of courtyard adjacent to archway • Creation of new steps from the proposed restaurant area to garden court • Reconfigured fire escape to garden court • Insertion of glazed doors leading onto garden court • Rendering of elevation facing garden court

Development Control Committee 96 of 132 Date printed 9 February 2011

2.3 The concurrent application for listed building consent (10/01552/LBC), which is also on this agenda, covers the remainder of the proposed internal and external alterations in addition to the above.

3. The site and surroundings 3.1 The Talbot Hotel is a grade I listed former medieval coaching inn, dating back to the mid-sixteenth century. It was extended through the 17th and 18th century, with most recent alterations occurring during the 1970s. 3.2 The hotel's primary frontage is the sixteenth century building located on New Street within the core of the historic market town. 3.3 The site is situated within a conservation area and in close proximity to several other listed buildings. Approximately 60 metres north of the site, behind the vicarage is a scheduled ancient monument associated with the former Saxon settlement.

4 Policy considerations 4.1 National planning policy PPS1– Sustainable development PPS4 - Planning for Sustainable Economic Growth PPS5 - Planning for the Historic Environment Good Practice Guide on Planning for Tourism

4.2 Regional Plan (RSS8) On 10th November 2010 the High Court ruled that the Secretary of State's decision to revoke Regional Spatial Strategies was unlawful as it had been taken without primary legislation. A statement was then issued by the Government reiterating their intention to remove RSSs and that this should be treated as a material consideration. However following further legal action the Secretary of State has now agreed that until the further court case in mid January it is for a Local Planning Authority to decide how much weight to attach to the letters that the Government have issued about Regional Spatial Strategies. Policy 27 - Regional priorities for the historic environment Policy 42 - Regional priorities for tourism

4.3 North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy 2008 Policy 13 – General sustainable development principles

4.4 Rural North Oundle and Thrapston Plan Policy 9 - Buildings of Local Architectural or Historic Interest

5 Relevant Planning History 5.1 79/01109/FUL and 79/01109/LBC - New wing comprising fourteen bedrooms on two floors - granted 23 October 1979. (This newest wing frames the south west corner of the courtyard and would remain unaltered under the current proposals). 5.2 Several other applications were received between 1954 and 2002, but none of significance. They were mostly for internal alterations and signage.

6 Consultations and Representations

6.1 Neighbours: no representations received. 6.2 Oundle Town Council: No objection. The town council welcomes the plans which will enhance the tourism aspects of the town. Concerns were raised about the installation of the glass doors which will impact on the free movement on people through the area.

Development Control Committee 97 of 132 Date printed 9 February 2011

6.3 English Heritage: Raise some concern about the proposals for the enclosure of the archway and the loss of plan form to the first floor of building 5 from the installation of toilets. Nonetheless, English Heritage state they have no objection and recommend that the application be determined in accordance with national and local policy guidance and on the basis of your specialist conservation advice. 6.4 Ancient Monuments Society: strongly support the principle of keeping the hotel in viable and sustainable use, but have concerns about the infill of the central archway and the demolition of single storey flat roof extension in the courtyard and replacement with new extension. (Further comments may follow in the update). 6.5 Northamptonshire Police: no objection or comment.

6.6 Ramblers Association: Public footpath UF4 runs alongside the rear (west side) of the property. It should not be obstructed by builders materials or vehicles. 6.7 NCC Archaeology: A condition is recommended for an archaeological programme of works to identify and record any surviving archaeological remains and/or evidence within the historic fabric of the buildings. 6.8 ENC conservation officer: Supports application in the main. Has concerns with the infilling of the archway, but considers the negative impact of this element of the proposals is outweighed by the public benefits of the wider scheme, especially the works of repair to the listed building.

6.9 A site notice was displayed. No other representations were received.

7 Evaluation 7.1 Principle of development 7.1.1 The overall intention behind the proposals for The Talbot Hotel is to improve the existing facilities to make them more attractive, functional and accessible for a wider range of users. Not only would the improved restaurant and bar facilities be likely to attract more local customers, the hotel improvements would attract increased tourism to the area which would in turn bring economic benefits to the town of Oundle and the wider district. Furthermore, any increased usage of the hotel would not only ensure that this important heritage asset is more widely appreciated throughout the population, but it would also help to ensure the building's ongoing care and maintenance into the future by keeping it's tourism and recreation use thriving. 7.1.2 The inner garden courtyard is currently largely detached from the main hotel due to the convoluted internal circulation arrangement, so the principle of opening up this under- used asset for greater appreciation and use by the general public is welcomed. 7.1.3 The principle of creating a level access reception area and accessible bedroom suite is also welcomed, as is the idea of providing covered ground floor access between the separate wings of the hotel. 7.1.4 The principle of allowing more of the original historic form and architecture of the buildings to be revealed is supported by policy HE10 of PPS5. East Midlands Regional Plan policies 27 and 42 both support the enhancement of existing tourism attractions and in particular improvements to accessibility and quality such facilities.

7.2 Impact on the listed building Alterations associated with the glazed enclosure of the entrance archway

7.2.1 Glazed archway enclosure with sliding (automatic) doors (1B) 7.2.2 The glazing would not be within a frame but it would be full-height, fixed to the existing oak beams above with spider fixings. The glass would be mounted 5mm from the archway walls with a single fixing, the gap being sealed with silicone. The existing

Development Control Committee 98 of 132 Date printed 9 February 2011

brick pavers would be replaced with a flagstone floor, beneath which would be a channel for the cabling and ducting works, enabling the removal of the existing unsightly air conditioning units, and externally mounted cabling and ducting under the archway. 7.2.3 English Heritage has not objected to this element of the proposal, even though they consider it would result in moderate harm to the significance of the listed building. They advise that the infilling would be "contrary to the traditional openness of a centrally important feature" but they go on to say that the recess back from the street frontage "mitigates its harm to some degree". English Heritage advise that the test in PPS5 policy HE9.4 be applied, whereby harm is weighed against the wider public benefits. 7.2.4 In terms of benefits, the overall scheme would bring significant public benefits in terms of local economy, tourism, and increased appreciation of this important heritage asset by a wider population and by future generations. The provision of an enclosed access between the two wings of the hotel is a pivotal part of the overall proposals and is therefore necessary to achieve the above mentioned public benefits. 7.2.5 Turning to the potential harm, the proposed glazed enclosure is the least invasive way of achieving the covered link. It would allow sight lines to be maintained between the street frontage and the courtyard beyond, and the work would be entirely reversible ensuring that no lasting harm to the building would result. The recessed position of the glazing would mitigate its visual impact from the street frontage. Overall, the minimal, short term harm to the building's significance caused by the glazed enclosure is far outweighed by the wider public benefits.

7.2.6 Reinstate existing opening and stepped threshold under archway (1A). This doorway would become the principal point of access to the hotel directing visitors past the impressive Queen Mary staircase. Physical evidence of the former doorway was observed on site, and archive evidence was submitted with the application. The reinstatement of this opening is therefore sympathetic to the historic form and character of the building and would increase public accessibility to the building's most dominant internal feature, the Queen Mary staircase.

7.2.7 Replacement of window with door to north elevation of courtyard adjacent to archway (1C). Although this is the oldest part of the building, evidence submitted with the application and observed on site demonstrates that this window and the wall in which it sits was installed post 1956. The proposal to now change this window for a door would not therefore be damaging to any of the original historic fabric. The proposed door would follow the style of other external doors in the building and would retain the existing character of the window.

Alterations associated with the removal and replacement of single storey extensions in the courtyard

7.2.8 Dismantle existing stone single storey restaurant extension (6A). This flat roof extension, despite its ornate elevation and stone mullion windows, is actually a 1949 construction which unacceptably dominates the 18th century inn yard building behind it and encroaches into what was once a much wider open courtyard. The removal of this modern extension would reveal the previously obscured elevation of the 18th century inn yard building, allowing the individual identity of adjoining buildings to be understood and the original openness of the courtyard to be appreciated.

7.2.9 Replacement glazed single storey restaurant extension (6B). In 1917, there was a glass structure known as the Icehouse situated in this location so this supports the principle of a glazed structure in this location. The proposed glazed extension would be much smaller than the removed stone extension in height, projection and length. This, together with it's glazed walls, would facilitate an appreciation of the upper floors

Development Control Committee 99 of 132 Date printed 9 February 2011

of the 18th century inn yard building (currently obscured by the 1949 extension) and the increased openness of the courtyard. Oak pillars would separate five glazed bays, respecting the rhythm and proportion of the host building, and glazed sides would support a rolled lead flat roof.

7.2.10 Reinstate stone facade, window and door (7A and 9B). As the replacement glazed extension would be significantly narrower than the existing stone extension, a certain degree of re-construction would be required to reinstate the former ground floor facade of the host building. This re-instatement, including two doors and a window lining up with the openings at first floor level, is a positive step and would be an improvement on the current situation whereby this fabric has been lost.

7.2.11 Dismantle existing porch and reinstate stone facade, door and threshold (1E). This porch, despite its ornate appearance, is a 1949 construction which detracts from the historical significance of the oldest parts of the hotel. The porch covers part of the rear elevation of the main New Street building (1626) and part of the main elevation of the northern courtyard building (18th century). The proposals would see this porch removed and the original fabric lines beneath reinstated. This would enhance the elevations of the 1626 and 18th century buildings and increase the openness of the courtyard.

Alterations associated with opening up the garden courtyard to the restaurant

7.2.12 Install three new glazed double doors and render the elevation (13A and 13D). This part of the building is an unattractive, flat-roofed, 1930s construction with vast expanses of patched up brickwork and no architectural merit. The proposed render would hide the unsightly patchwork of brick on this elevation which currently detracts from the setting of the garden. The proposal to alter the elevation to replace existing windows with a more inviting looking series of glazed doors would only enhance this low quality elevation. The proposed doors, together with the internal alterations proposed in 10/01552/LBC, would also enable public access to the garden which is currently an under-used asset.

7.2.13 Construct eight new steps up to garden courtyard and realign the fire escape stairs (13C). Currently the access to the garden courtyard exits from staff service corridors and up a flight of narrow and dilapidated cast concrete steps that emerge from underneath a fire escape stairway. The proposed wide, sweeping steps would be much more attractive, inviting and far better suited to the hotel and would improve relationship of the sub-ground level accommodation fronting onto the garden courtyard. Excavation works would be required to dig out the steps. Subject to the archaeological recording condition this proposal would not have an unacceptable impact on the listed building. There would be no reduction in the overall ground level of the rest of the garden. The existing metal external escape staircase that leads from guest bedrooms onto the garden would be slightly realigned so not to detract from the openness that would be created by the rest of the proposals. This is a sensible and non-intrusive solution that would have negligible impact on the listed building.

7.3 Archaeological issues 7.3.1 The application site was identified in the Oundle Extensive Urban Survey as occupied by a group of tenements in the medieval period. Evidence relating to the current buildings may also be present. Whilst the proposals are sympathetic to the historic fabric of the building, they will remove 20th century additions so will inevitably lead to the loss, alteration or concealment of further evidence in the historic fabric of the buildings and outbuildings and their development and use. A scheme of works to identify and record this evidence prior to redevelopment taking place will ensure that

Development Control Committee 100 of 132 Date printed 9 February 2011

information is not lost. Whilst the proposed development will have an impact on the historic fabric of the listed buildings and upon any archaeological deposits present below ground, this does not represent an over-riding constraint on development provided that adequate provision is made for the investigation and recording of any remains that are affected. This can be secured by condition.

7.4 Visual impact, impact on the conservation area and on the setting of nearby listed buildings 7.4.1 Glazed archway: The front portion of glazing would be set back 3.4 metres from the front facade, making it appear deep in the shadows of the archway. The effect of the glazing may be visible when standing still directly in front of the archway, but would not be visible in passing views due to it being so heavily recessed. The historic gates would remain and would continue to be the main feature of the archway that draws the eye as you pass by the hotel. It is unlikely that glare would result as the sun would never be at a low enough angle to reflect on the recessed glazing through the archway. 7.4.2 Restaurant extension: The new glazed extension would not be highly visible from the street. The main views would be from within the site as you approach from the car park and Drummingwell Lane at the rear. 7.4.3 Garden court: As the garden court is completely enclosed from all sides the proposals in this area would have no impact on the conservation area or the setting of other listed buildings. 7.4.4 The few minimal changes that are proposed to windows and doors would be within the enclosed courtyard area, and so would not have a significant impact on the conservation area or the setting of nearby listed buildings. 7.4.5 Overall, the proposals would not have a detrimental impact on the streetscene, the conservation area or the setting of nearby listed buildings.

7.5 Highways and rights of way 7.5.1 The proposals are entirely within the enclosed pedestrian area of the site and would not affect vehicle movement. 7.5.2 The application form states that the development would result in a 36sq.m reduction in internal floorspace and a lesser number of guest bedrooms, so additional parking would not be necessary. 7.5.3 Whilst the site is adjacent a public footpath (UF004) this footpath would not be affected by the proposed development. 7.5.4 In response to the town council's comment about the impact on the free movement of people through the area, the applicant's agent has issued the following statement: "The Town Council has expressed concern that the glazed enclosure of the archway would disrupt the ability of some members of the public who use the hotel grounds as a short cut between New Street and Drummingwell Lane. The applicant advises that this is not a designated legal right of way nor is there any deemed right of way as the hotel has, periodically, and for various reasons, exercised its right to close or block the short cut which is clearly over private land. Indeed, the gates at the front of the arched entrance have always remained in place. Notwithstanding the possibility of periodic closure, for example the proposed building works or for security reasons (from 11 pm or midnight – depending on licensing hours - until say 7am), for commercial purposes the applicant has no intention of denying access to the reinstated inn yard. To the contrary, it is in the applicant’s interest to facilitate access and for this reason the applicant has proposed that the glass doors be on an automated sliding mechanism. He is aware that in doing so some members of the public will continue to use the hotel as a short cut. The glazed lobby would simply give the applicant security control over such access, particularly late at night ".

Development Control Committee 101 of 132 Date printed 9 February 2011

7.6 Impact on neighbouring occupiers 7.6.1 There would be no new openings, only altered ones, and none of these would overlook neighbouring land or property. All new buildings/ structures would be enclosed within the site so that there would be no overbearing or overshadowing impact for neighbouring properties. The proposals would not introduce any additional noise impact.

8 Other issues 8.1 Crime and disorder: Northamptonshire Police have raised no objections to the proposals. 8.2 Access for the disabled: The overall proposal would improve the situation by providing a level access bedroom suite that would be fully accessible from the new reception area, together with ground floor disabled toilet facilities.

9. Conclusion 9.1 In recommending this application for approval, the relevant planning guidance and policies were identified as PPS1, PPS4, PPS5, policies 27 and 42 of the East Midlands Regional Plan, and policy 13 of the North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy 2008. Having regard to these, the representations received and any other material planning reasons, the main issues were identified as principle of development; the impact on the listed building; archaeology; the visual impact, impact on the conservation area and impact on the setting of listed buildings; highways and rights of way; impact on neighbours and other matters. The application has been recommended for approval as: • The principle of the development is acceptable and is consistent with the development plan. • The proposal would have an acceptable impact on the character, appearance and setting of the listed building, when balanced against the public benefits that would be achieved. - The proposal would not have a significant impact on archaeological remains. - The development would not harm the visual amenity or character of the conservation area or the setting of nearby listed buildings. - The proposal would not have an adverse impact on neighbouring occupiers. • The proposal would not have an adverse impact on the local highway network or rights of way.

10 Recommendation

10.1 It is recommended that the application be GRANTED subject to conditions.

Conditions/Reasons -

1. The development hereby permitted shall begin not later than three years from the date of this decision. Reason: Statutory requirement under provision of Section 51 of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004.

2. Notwithstanding the details already submitted, prior to the commencement of development a more detailed schedule of works shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The works shall be carried out in complete accordance with this subsequently approved schedule of works and thereafter retained as such, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the local planning authority. Reason: In the interests of preserving the historic character, fabric and appearance of the grade I listed building and its setting.

Development Control Committee 102 of 132 Date printed 9 February 2011

3. No development/works shall take place until the applicant, or their agents or successors in title, has secured the implementation of a programme of archaeological work in accordance with a written scheme of investigation and recording that has been submitted by the applicant and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The recording shall take the form of an intensive watching brief, and shall cover all works to the building and all works below ground. Archaeological investigation and recording shall thereafter be carried out in the accordance with the approved scheme, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the local planning authority. Reason: To ensure that features of archaeological interest are properly examined and recorded, in accordance with PPS5.

4. Precautions shall be taken to secure and protect the fabric of the building against accidental loss, damage, or theft during building work. Details shall be submitted to and approved by the local planning authority before works begin on site, and the relevant work carried out in accordance with such approval. No features shall be disturbed or removed temporarily or permanently except as indicated on the approved drawings or with the prior approval in writing of the local planning authority. Any damage caused shall be rectified in accordance with a scheme to be submitted and approved by the local planning authority prior to the completion of development. Reason: In the interests of preserving the historic character, fabric and appearance of the grade I listed building.

5. All demolition shall be carried out by hand or by tools held in the hand rather than power driven tools. All removed material shall be stored for re-use. Reason: In the interests of preserving the historic character, fabric and appearance of the grade I listed building and to enable historically or architecturally important material to be salvaged and re-used.

6. Prior to the commencement of works, a detailed specification for the repair and cleaning of newly exposed masonry shall be submitted to an approved in writing by the local planning authority. Works shall proceed only in full accordance with the approved details. Reason: In the interests of preserving the historic character, fabric and appearance of the grade I listed building.

7. All new stonework shall match the existing as closely as possible. It shall be constructed using a natural hydraulic lime mortar mix which is free from any cement. No development shall commence until details of the stone type, mortar composition, joint width and finish have been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority (LPA), and following this representative sample panels of no less than 1 metre square have been constructed on site for the inspection and written approval of a representative of the LPA. Works shall proceed only in full accordance with the approved details. Reason: In the interests of preserving the historic character, fabric and appearance of the grade I listed building and its setting.

8. All proposed external pipework, including all rainwater goods, soil and overflow pipes, shall be of cast iron or cast aluminium and painted in accordance with details to be agreed in writing by the local planning authority prior to commencement of development and thereafter retained and maintained in perpetuity. Reason: In the interests of preserving the historic character, fabric and appearance of the grade I listed building and its setting.

Development Control Committee 103 of 132 Date printed 9 February 2011

9. Prior to commencement of the work, precise details and samples of material for the new proposed new stepped thresholds and the proposed new flagstone floor to the glazed lobby shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details. Reason: In the interests of preserving the historic character, fabric and appearance of the grade I listed building and its setting.

10. Notwithstanding the details already submitted, prior to the commencement of works, drawings at a scale of no less than 1:20 for all internal and external joinery and glazing, including glazing bar profiles and internal door profiles, shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details. Reason: In the interests of preserving the historic character, fabric and appearance of the grade I listed building and its setting.

11. Prior to the commencement of works, precise details of the design and construction of the new external steps to the garden courtyard, together with any associated handrails, shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The development shall be completed in accordance with these subsequently approved details. Reason: In the interests of preserving the historic character and appearance of the grade I listed building.

12. The development hereby permitted shall be carried out strictly in accordance with the approved plans; plans received by the local planning authority on 11 November 2010, drawing numbers: AL(2-)02, AL(2-)04, AL(2-)07, AL(2-)08, AL(2-)09, AL(2-11)04, AL(2- 06)05, AC(31)01, AC(2-)02, AL(2-13)01, AL(2-13)02, AL(2-13)03, AL(2-13)04, AL(2- 13)05, AL(2-13)06, AL(2-11)01, AL(2-11)02, AL(2-11)03, AL(2-11)05, AL(2-11)06, AL(2- 09)01, AL(2-09)02, AL(2-08)01, AL(2-08)02, AL(2-05)01, AL(2-05)02, AL(2-05)03, AL(2- 05)04, AL(2-05)07, AL(2-07)01, AL(2-07)02, AL(2-07)03, AL(2-06)01, AL(2-06)02, AL(2- 06)03, AL(2-06)04, AL(2-04)01, AL(2-02)01, AL(2-02)02, AL(2-02)03, AL(2-02)04, AL(2- 01)01, AL(2-01)02, AL(2-01)03, AL(2-01)04, AL(2-01)05, AL(2-01)06, AL(2-01)07, AL(2- 01)08, AL(2-01)09. Reason: In order to clarify the terms of the consent and to ensure that the development is carried out as permitted.

Development Control Committee 104 of 132 Date printed 9 February 2011

Committee Report Committee Date : 9 February 2011 Printed: 28 January 2011

Case Officer Samantha Hammonds EN/10/01552/LBC

Date received Date valid Overall Expiry Ward Parish 23 August 2010 16 November 2010 11 January 2011 Oundle Oundle

Applicant Bulldog Pub Company Ltd

Agent Horsley Townsend Architects Ltd - Mr G Townsend

Location The Talbot Hotel 7 New Street Oundle Peterborough Northamptonshire PE8 4EA

Proposal Internal and external alterations to include: removal of previous extension, new extension, works to internal walls, fenestration, ceilings and floors, creation of new bathrooms and erection of glazed screens. For full details of extent of works proposed, see Design, Access and Justification Statement received 11/11/2010 and amendment received 16/11/2010

1 Summary of recommendation 1.1 That the application be GRANTED subject to conditions.

2. The proposal 2.1 The overall proposal is to make an extensive range of alterations to The Talbot Hotel with a view to improving circulation within and around the hotel and making the general layout more practical and user-friendly for both staff and customers. The aim is also to improve the physical appearance of the building both internally and externally by reinstating and emphasising historic features that have been lost, overshadowed or confused by previous alterations. The guest bedrooms would reduce in number but would be made larger and a level access bedroom suite would be created. 2.2 This application for listed building consent (10/01552/LBC) covers all the proposed internal alterations as well as the external alterations that have already been discussed in the report for the concurrent planning application (10/01551/FUL).

3. The site and surroundings 3.1 The Talbot Hotel is a grade I listed former medieval coaching inn, dating back to the mid-sixteenth century. It was extended through the 17th and 18th century, with most recent alterations occurring during the 1970s. 3.2 The hotel's primary frontage is the sixteenth century building located on New Street within the core of the historic market town. 3.3 The site is situated within a conservation area and in close proximity to several other listed buildings.

4 Policy considerations 4.1 National planning policy PPS5 - Planning for the Historic Environment – Policy HE9

Development Control Committee 105 of 132 Date printed 9 February 2011

4.2 Regional Plan (RSS8) On 10th November 2010 the High Court ruled that the Secretary of State's decision to revoke Regional Spatial Strategies was unlawful as it had been taken without primary legislation. A statement was then issued by the Government reiterating their intention to remove RSSs and that this should be treated as a material consideration. However following further legal action the Secretary of State has now agreed that until the further court case in mid January it is for a Local Planning Authority to decide how much weight to attach to the letters that the Government have issued about Regional Spatial Strategies. Policy 27 - Regional priorities for the historic environment

4.3 North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy 2008 Policy 13 – General sustainable development principles

4.4 Rural North Oundle and Thrapston Plan Policy 9 - Buildings of Local Architectural or Historic Interest

5 Relevant Planning History 5.1 79/01109/FUL and 79/01109/LBC - New wing comprising fourteen bedrooms on two floors - granted 23 October 1979. (This newest wing frames the south west corner of the courtyard and would remain unaltered under the current proposals). 5.2 Several other applications were received between 1954 and 2002, but none of significance. They were mostly for internal alterations and signage.

6 Consultations and Representations 6.1 Neighbours: no representations received. 6.2 Oundle Town Council: No objection. The town council welcomes the plans which will enhance the tourism aspects of the town. Concerns were raised about the installation of the glass doors which will impact on the free movement on people through the area. 6.3 English Heritage: Raise some concern about the proposals for the enclosure of the archway and the loss of plan form to the first floor of building 5 from the installation of toilets. Nonetheless, English Heritage state they have no objection and recommend that the application be determined in accordance with national and local policy guidance and on the basis of your specialist conservation advice. 6.4 Ancient Monuments Society: strongly support the principle of keeping the hotel in viable and sustainable use, but have concerns about the infill of the central archway and the demolition of single storey flat roof extension in the courtyard and replacement with new extension. (Further comments may follow in the update). 6.5 Northamptonshire Police: no objection or comment. 6.6 Ramblers Association: Public footpath UF4 runs alongside the rear (west side) of the property. It should not be obstructed by builders materials or vehicles. 6.7 NCC Archaeology: A condition is recommended for an archaeological programme of works to identify and record any surviving archaeological remains and/or evidence within the historic fabric of the buildings. 6.8 ENC Conservation Officer: Supports application in the main. Has concerns with the infilling of the archway, but considers the negative impact of this element of the proposals is outweighed by the public benefits of the wider scheme, especially the works of repair to the listed building. 6.9 A site notice was displayed. No other representations were received.

Development Control Committee 106 of 132 Date printed 9 February 2011

7 Evaluation - Impact on the listed building itself

Alterations to the New Street building

7.1 Glazed archway enclosure with sliding (automatic) doors (1B) 7.1.1 The glazing would not be mounted within a frame. It would be full-height, fixed to the existing oak beams above with spider fixings. The glass would be mounted 5mm from the archway walls with a single fixing, the gap being sealed with silicone. The existing brick pavers would be replaced with a flagstone floor, beneath which would be a channel for the cabling and ducting works, enabling the removal of the existing unsightly air conditioning units and externally mounted cabling and ducting under the archway. 7.1.2 English Heritage has not objected to this element of the proposal, even though they consider it would result in moderate harm to the significance of the listed building. They advise that the infilling would be "contrary to the traditional openness of a centrally important feature" but they go on to say that the proposed recess back from the street frontage "mitigates its harm to some degree". English Heritage advise that the test in PPS5 policy HE9.4 be applied, whereby harm is weighed against the wider public benefits. 7.1.3 In terms of benefits, the overall scheme would bring significant public benefits in terms of local economy, tourism, and increased appreciation of this important heritage asset by a wider population and by future generations. The provision of an enclosed access between the two wings of the hotel is a pivotal part of the overall proposals and is therefore necessary to achieve the above mentioned public benefits. 7.1.4 Turning to the potential harm, the proposed glazed enclosure is the least invasive way of achieving the covered link. It would allow sight lines to be maintained between the street frontage and the courtyard beyond, and the work would be entirely reversible ensuring that no lasting harm to the building would result. The recessed position of the glazing would mitigate its visual impact from the street frontage. Overall, the minimal, short term harm to the building's significance caused by the glazed enclosure is far outweighed by the wider public benefits.

7.2 Reinstate existing opening and stepped threshold under archway (1A) 7.2.1 This reinstated doorway would become the principal point of access to the hotel directing visitors past the historically significant staircase said to be from Fotheringhay Castle. Physical evidence of the former doorway was observed on site, and archive evidence was submitted with the application. The reinstatement of this opening is therefore sympathetic to the historic form and character of the building and would increase public accessibility to the building's most dominant and significant internal feature, the Fotheringhay staircase.

7.3 Reinstate internal openings and form new load bearing pillar at foot of main stair (1D) 7.3.1 Archive evidence submitted with the application shows that none of the affected brickwork is original. The majority of this wall dates from the 1956 modifications with a small amount of late 19th century work. No invasive structural works would be necessary as the existing structural beams would be retained. The proposal would be beneficial as it would open up a key reception room to the principal Fotheringhay staircase recreating the openness that appears, from archive evidence, to have existed historically.

7.4 Dismantle existing porch and reinstate stone facade, door and threshold (1E) 7.4.1 This porch, despite its ornate appearance, is a 1949 construction which detracts from the historical significance of the oldest parts of the hotel. The porch covers part of the rear elevation of the main New Street building (1626) and part of the main elevation of the northern courtyard building (18th century). The proposals would see this porch removed and the original fabric lines beneath reinstated. This would enhance the

Development Control Committee 107 of 132 Date printed 9 February 2011

elevations of the 1626 and 18th century buildings and increase the openness of the courtyard.

7.5 Alterations to extend the lounge bar servery (4B) and to convert ground floor toilets to a second lounge bar and servery (4A) 7.5.1 The wall that separates the toilets from the lounge bar would be removed. The original masonry wall that divided these rooms was removed during the 1956 modifications, before being partially reinstated in recent years to accommodate the current lounge bar servery. The proposed removal of this modern wall would not therefore affect any of the historic fabric of the building. 7.5.2 The partition walls within the toilets themselves would be removed to provide an open layout to this room. Historic plan evidence shows that these partitions were added as part of the 1956 modifications when a former office and store was sub-divided to form toilet cubicles. The proposal to remove this modern fabric would be beneficial as it would revert this part of the hotel to its traditional open layout. 7.5.2 The floor to what is currently the gents toilets would be lowered by 500mm to be more consistent with the floor level of the New Street lounge bar. This would enable the existing bar servery to extend through to serve both the existing lounge bar and the proposed new lounge bar. As the floor was created post 1956, its removal would not be detrimental to the historic interest of the building.

Alterations to the timber framed building (south wing, snug bar)

7.6 Replacement of window with door to north elevation of courtyard adjacent to archway (1C) 7.6.1 Although this is the oldest part of the building, archive evidence submitted with the application and physical evidence observed on site demonstrates that the window, and the wall in which it sits, was installed as part of the 1956 modifications. The proposal to now change this window for a door would not therefore be damaging to any of the original historic fabric. The proposed door would follow the style of other external doors in the building and would retain the existing character of the window.

7.7 Removal of internal partitions that form toilet accommodation at ground floor (2A) 7.7.1 Historic plan evidence shows that these partitions, were installed as part of the 1956 modifications when a former kitchen was sub-divided to form toilet cubicles. The proposal to remove these modern partitions would revert the room back to its former open layout. 7.7.2 The frosted glazing would be replaced with clear glass to reflect the proposed use as a reception area, enhancing the character and appearance of the building.

7.8 Alterations to combine first floor bedrooms 30 and 31 into a single suite (2B and 2C) 7.8.1 A shorter than average doorway would be created by removing a panel that is currently supported by the original timber frame structure. The affected wall panel comprises modern plasterboard with rockwool insulation, which suggests that a doorway may once have existed in this location. The removal of this modern addition would not be detrimental to the historic fabric of the building. As the proposal would be for an open doorway with no new closable door or doorframe, there would be no impact on the timber frame itself. 7.8.2 The late 20th century partitions that form the existing ensuite and built in wardrobe would be removed. No historic fabric would be affected. 7.8.3 Rather than blocking up the existing doorway to bedroom 30, this would remain in place but would simply be kept locked.

Alterations to former stable buildings (south wing)

7.9 Dismantle existing staircase and form new realigned timber staircase (11A)

Development Control Committee 108 of 132 Date printed 9 February 2011

7.9.1 Archive plan evidence shows that a steep timber staircase once existed in this location but this was replaced, post 1956, by a wider staircase that incorporates two 90 degree turns with landings and is enclosed by plasterboard walls. The proposed removal of this modern staircase would not itself harm the fabric or historic interest of the building. 7.9.2 The replacement staircase would be more sympathetic to the character of the building as it would be a timber construction and the steps would lead around the 90 degree turns in a more traditional style. A condition is recommended in relation to the precise details of the replacement staircase and the associated bannister 7.9.3 To facilitate the realigned staircase an existing store at ground floor level would need to be removed but only late 20th century partitions would be affected. The resultant open layout would be much more traditional than the current situation of tight, convoluted corridors and angled walls.

7.10 Form new disabled ramp and reinstate former opening to link stable building with the timber building (11B)

7.10.1 A built-in cupboard and masonry wall would be removed to create a doorway between the timber building and the stable building. Archive plan evidence shows that a doorway originally existed in this position, and that the blocking up occurred post 1956. The reinstatement of this arched opening is therefore acceptable and would not harm the historic significance of the building. 7.10.2 The existing floor level behind the proposed new staircase in the stable building would be reduced by 590mm to allow for the proposed disabled access ramp. However archive plans show that this floor level was artificially raised in the late 20th century. It is therefore unlikely that any of the original historic fabric would be affected. Nonetheless, the benefits of providing internal ramped access to a level access bedroom suite would outweigh any small degree of harm that may possibly occur.

7.11 Install partitions to create ground floor toilets (11C) 7.11.1 The installation of stud partitions in a currently open sitting room would detract from the original openness of this part of the building. However, the stud partitions would not harm the historic fabric of the building and could be removed in the future to re- instate the open aspect of this room. The practical benefits of providing ground floor accessible toilets to this wing of the hotel would outweigh the short term, reversible harm from the loss of openness. 7.11.2 A new below ground drainage connection would be required to facilitate the toilets, but any invasive works would be sufficiently supervised by the 'archaeological watching brief' that would be imposed by condition if approval is granted.

7.12 Alterations to enlarge ensuite to bedroom 32 (11D) 7.12.1 An existing partition wall between a store and the ensuite would be removed to combine these rooms into a larger ensuite. The existing store doorway would be blocked up. These proposals would not affect any of the building's historic fabric or character.

Alterations to tabret room building (south wing)

7.13 Alterations to provide a level access bedroom suite (8A) 7.13.1 A ramp access is proposed within an existing corridor to provide access to the proposed disabled bedroom suite. The benefits associated with this provision would outweigh any harm. 7.13.2 Stud partitions are proposed to divide the large 'tabret room' into a level access bedroom, ensuite and access corridor. This would detract from the original openness

Development Control Committee 109 of 132 Date printed 9 February 2011

of this part of the tabret room. However, the stud partitions would not harm the historic fabric of the building and could be removed in the future to re-instate the open aspect of this room. The practical benefits of providing a ground floor accessible bedroom suite would outweigh the short term, reversible harm from the loss of openness.

Alterations to the Inn Yard building (north wing restaurant)

7.14 Dismantle existing stone single storey restaurant extension (6A) 7.14.1 This flat roof extension, despite its ornate elevation and stone mullion windows, is actually a 1949 construction which unacceptably dominates the 18th century inn yard building behind it and encroaches into what was once a much wider open courtyard. The removal of this modern extension would reveal the previously obscured elevation of the 18th century inn yard building, allowing the individual identity of adjoining buildings to be understood and the original openness of the courtyard to be appreciated.

7.15 Replacement glazed single storey restaurant extension (6B) 7.15.1 In 1917, there was a glass structure known as 'The Icehouse' situated in this location. This supports the principle of a glazed structure in this location. The proposed glazed extension would be much smaller than the removed stone extension in height, projection and length. This, together with it's glazed walls, would facilitate an appreciation of the upper floors of the 18th century inn yard building (currently obscured by the 1949 extension) and the increased openness of the courtyard. Oak pillars would separate five glazed bays, respecting the rhythm and proportion of the host building, and glazed sides would support a rolled lead flat roof.

7.16 Reinstate ground floor stone facade, window and door (7A and 9B) 7.16.1 As the replacement glazed extension would be significantly narrower than the existing stone extension, a certain degree of re-construction would be required to reinstate the former stone facade of the host building. This re-instatement, including two doors and a window lining up with the openings at first floor level, is a positive step and would be an improvement on the current situation whereby this fabric has been lost. A condition is recommended that requires sample panels of the work to be constructed on site for the prior approval of the local planning authority, to ensure the quality of the stonework.

7.17 Internal alterations to restaurant (7B, 7C, 5A and 5B) 7.17.1 The walls of an existing store would be removed to open this area up into the restaurant. The walls are of modern construction comprising concrete blockwork, so it's removal would not be detrimental to the listed building. 7.17.2 It is proposed to lower the internal floor level of what is currently a raised dining area so that it coincides with the door sill levels of the reinstated external facade. The affected floor is a late 20th century concrete floor so its removal would not result in the loss of historic fabric. 7.17.3 It is proposed to knock through a stone wall to the side of a large stone feature fireplace in the existing restaurant. There is a hardwood lintel within this wall at a height corresponding with the top of a doorway, and the stonework beneath differs to the remainder of the wall. This strongly suggests that a doorway once existed in this location. The proposal to remove this substandard stonework and reinstate the former doorway would enhance the historic character and appearance of the building. The doorway would remain open and no door or frame would be installed, enhancing the authenticity of the historic opening. 7.17.4 It is proposed to remove two timber glazed partitions at the base of the stairs. Despite their ornate appearance, these glazed hardwood partitions beneath plastered

Development Control Committee 110 of 132 Date printed 9 February 2011

bulkheads were installed post 1956. Their style gives a 20th century corporate 'hotel' appearance and is not true to the historic character of the building. The proposal to remove these intricate divisions and reinstate open links between rooms would give a more traditional feel and would better reflect the historic interest of the building.

7.18 Remove hotel reception fixtures to reinstate as one open room (5C) 7.18.1 Plans dating from 1956 show that this area had no partitions or fixtures but was one open room, referred to as the sitting room. The reception fixtures were clearly installed post 1956, and their modern corporate 'hotel' style would support this conclusion. The proposal to remove these modern fixtures and reinstate this area as a single open room, to be used as part of the restaurant, would therefore be true to the historic character of the building.

7.19 Internal alterations to create toilet accommodation at first floor (5E) 7.19.1 Partitions that form an existing corridor, bedroom and built in wardrobe would be removed and new partitions installed to create female toilet accommodation with four cubicles. Further partitions that form an ensuite and housekeepers store would be removed and new partitions installed to create male toilet accommodations. Services and drainage would use existing systems where possible and otherwise would be non invasive and concealed by partitions. The resultant realigned internal corridor would give a more sensible, workable and sympathetic arrangement than the current convoluted situation of twisting corridors. Overall these proposed alterations are considered an improvement.

Alterations to the former coach store (north wing)

7.20 Reinstate external facade (9B) 7.20.1 Following demolition of the single storey restaurant extension, a certain degree of re- construction would be required to reinstate the former stone facade of this building. This re-instatement is a positive step and would be an improvement on the current situation whereby this historic fabric has been lost.

7.21 Reinstate and widen a former opening to create a new personnel door (9A) 7.21.1 The former coach store building is currently used as the hotel kitchen. The current personnel doorway from the kitchen leads into the single storey extension that is proposed for demolition, and would be blocked up when the external stone facade is reinstated. A new personnel doorway between the kitchen and the restaurant would therefore be needed.

7.21.2 It is proposed to reinstate a former opening in what was once an external wall on the north flank of the building. This opening would be wider than it was previously in order to accommodate the dual door in-out arrangement that is required for waiting staff. Archive plans show that a doorway existed here in 1956, so the principle of reinstating this is acceptable. The removal of historic fabric to facilitate a double width doorway would cause a small degree of harm to the significance of the building. However, in line with the approach in policy HE9 of PPS5, this harm would be outweighed by the wider benefits of the overall scheme.

Alterations associated with opening up the garden courtyard to the restaurant

7.22 Install three new glazed double doors and render the elevation (13A and 13D) 7.22.1 This part of the building is an unattractive, flat-roofed, 1930s construction with vast expanses of patched up brickwork and no architectural merit. The proposed render would hide the unsightly patchwork of brick on this elevation which currently detracts from the setting of the garden. The proposal to alter the elevation to replace existing

Development Control Committee 111 of 132 Date printed 9 February 2011

windows with a more inviting looking series of glazed doors would only enhance this low quality elevation. The proposed doors, together with the internal alterations, would also enable public access to the garden which is currently an under-used asset.

7.23 Construct eight new external steps up to garden courtyard and realign the fire escape stairs (13C) 7.23.1 Currently the access to the garden courtyard exits from staff service corridors and up a flight of narrow and dilapidated cast concrete steps that emerge from underneath a fire escape stairway. The proposed wide, sweeping steps would be much more attractive, inviting and far better suited to the hotel and would improve relationship of the sub-ground level accommodation fronting onto the garden courtyard. 7.23.2 Excavation works would be required to dig out the steps. Subject to the recommended archaeological recording condition this proposal would not have an unacceptable impact on the listed building or the associated heritage assets. There would be no reduction in the overall ground level of the rest of the garden. 7.23.3 The existing metal external escape staircase that leads from guest bedrooms onto the garden would be slightly realigned so not to detract from the openness that would be created by the rest of the proposals. This is a sensible and non-intrusive solution that would have negligible impact on the listed building.

8 Other impacts

8.1 Archaeological issues 8.1.1 The application site was identified in the Oundle Extensive Urban Survey as occupied by a group of tenements in the medieval period. Evidence relating to the current buildings may also be present. Whilst the proposals are sympathetic to the historic fabric of the building, they will remove 20th century additions so will inevitably lead to the loss, alteration or concealment of further evidence in the historic fabric of the buildings and outbuildings and their development and use. A scheme of works to identify and record this evidence prior to redevelopment taking place will ensure that information is not lost. Whilst the proposed development will have an impact on the historic fabric of the listed buildings and upon any archaeological deposits present below ground, this does not represent an over-riding constraint on development provided that adequate provision is made for the investigation and recording of any remains that are affected. This can be secured by condition.

8.2 Impact on the setting of other nearby listed buildings 8.2.1 Glazed archway: The front portion of glazing would be set back 3.4 metres from the front facade, making it appear deep in the shadows of the archway. The effect of the glazing may be visible when standing still directly in front of the archway, but would not be visible in passing views due to it being so heavily recessed. The historic gates would remain and would continue to be the main feature of the archway that draws the eye as you pass by the hotel. It is unlikely that glare would result as the sun would never be at a low enough angle to reflect on the recessed glazing through the archway. 8.2.2 Restaurant extension: The new glazed extension would not be highly visible from the street. The main views would be from within the site as you approach from the car park and Drummingwell Lane at the rear. 8.2.3 Garden court: As the garden court is completely enclosed from all sides the proposals in this area would have no impact on the setting of other listed buildings. 8.2.4 The few minimal changes that are proposed to windows and doors would be within the enclosed courtyard area, and so would not have a significant impact on the setting of nearby listed buildings. 8.2.5 Overall, the proposals would not have a detrimental impact on the setting of nearby listed buildings.

Development Control Committee 112 of 132 Date printed 9 February 2011

9. Conclusion

9.1 In recommending this application for approval, the relevant planning guidance and policies were identified as PPS5, policy 27 of the East Midlands Regional Plan, and policy 13 of the North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy 2008. Having regard to these, the representations received and any other material reasons, the main issues were identified as the impact on the character, appearance and setting of the listed building itself, the impact on the setting of other nearby listed buildings and archaeological impacts. The application has been recommended for approval as: - The proposal would have an acceptable impact on the character, appearance and setting of the listed building, when balanced against the public benefits that would be achieved. - The development would not harm the setting of other nearby listed buildings. - The proposal would not have a significant impact on archaeological remains.

10 Recommendation

10.1 It is recommended that the application be GRANTED subject to conditions.

Conditions/Reasons -

1. The development hereby permitted shall begin not later than three years from the date of this decision. Reason: Statutory requirement under provision of Section 51 of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004.

2. Notwithstanding the details already submitted, prior to the commencement of development a more detailed schedule of works shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The works shall be carried out in complete accordance with this subsequently approved schedule of works and thereafter retained as such, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the local planning authority. Reason: In the interests of preserving the historic character, fabric and appearance of the grade I listed building and its setting.

3. No development/works shall take place until the applicant, or their agents or successors in title, has secured the implementation of a programme of archaeological work in accordance with a written scheme of investigation and recording that has been submitted by the applicant and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The recording shall take the form of an intensive watching brief, and shall cover all works to the building and all works below ground. Archaeological investigation and recording shall thereafter be carried out in the accordance with the approved scheme, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the local planning authority. Reason: To ensure that features of archaeological interest are properly examined and recorded, in accordance with PPS5.

4. Precautions shall be taken to secure and protect the fabric and interior architectural features against accidental loss, damage, or theft during building work. Details shall be submitted to and approved by the local planning authority before works begin on site, and the relevant work carried out in accordance with such approval. No features shall be disturbed or removed temporarily or permanently except as indicated on the approved drawings or with the prior approval in writing of the local planning authority. Any damage caused shall be rectified in accordance with a scheme to be submitted and approved by the local planning authority prior to the completion of development. Reason: In the interests of preserving the historic character, fabric and appearance of the grade I listed building.

Development Control Committee 113 of 132 Date printed 9 February 2011

5. All demolition and removal of internal fabric shall be carried out by hand or by tools held in the hand rather than power driven tools. All removed material shall be stored for re-use. Reason: In the interests of preserving the historic character, fabric and appearance of the grade I listed building and to enable historically or architecturally important material to be salvaged and re-used.

6. Prior to the commencement of works, a detailed specification for the repair and cleaning of newly exposed masonry shall be submitted to an approved in writing by the local planning authority. Works shall proceed only in full accordance with the approved details. Reason: In the interests of preserving the historic character, fabric and appearance of the grade I listed building.

7. All new stonework shall match the existing as closely as possible. It shall be constructed using a natural hydraulic lime mortar mix which is free from any cement. No development shall commence until details of the stone type, mortar composition, joint width and finish have been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority (LPA), and following this representative sample panels of no less than 1 metre square have been constructed on site for the inspection and written approval of a representative of the LPA. Works shall proceed only in full accordance with the approved details. Reason: In the interests of preserving the historic character, fabric and appearance of the grade I listed building and its setting.

8. All proposed external pipework, including all rainwater goods, soil and overflow pipes, shall be of cast iron or cast aluminium and painted in accordance with details to be agreed in writing by the local planning authority prior to commencement of development and thereafter retained and maintained in perpetuity. Reason: In the interests of preserving the historic character, fabric and appearance of the grade I listed building and its setting.

9. Prior to commencement of the work, precise details and samples of material for the new proposed new stepped thresholds and the proposed new flagstone floor to the glazed lobby shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details. Reason: In the interests of preserving the historic character, fabric and appearance of the grade I listed building and its setting.

10. Notwithstanding the details already submitted, prior to the commencement of works, drawings at a scale of no less than 1:20 for all internal and external joinery and glazing, including glazing bar profiles and internal door profiles, shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details. Reason: In the interests of preserving the historic character, fabric and appearance of the grade I listed building and its setting.

11. Prior to the commencement of works, precise details of the design and construction of the new external steps to the garden courtyard, together with any associated handrails, shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The development shall be completed in accordance with these subsequently approved details. Reason: In the interests of preserving the historic character and appearance of the grade I listed building.

Development Control Committee 114 of 132 Date printed 9 February 2011

12. The development hereby permitted shall be carried out strictly in accordance with the approved plans; plans received by the local planning authority on 11 November 2010, drawing numbers: AL(2-)02, AL(2-)04, AL(2-)07, AL(2-)08, AL(2-)09, AL(2-11)04, AL(2- 06)05, AC(31)01, AC(2-)02, AL(2-13)01, AL(2-13)02, AL(2-13)03, AL(2-13)04, AL(2- 13)05, AL(2-13)06, AL(2-11)01, AL(2-11)02, AL(2-11)03, AL(2-11)05, AL(2-11)06, AL(2- 09)01, AL(2-09)02, AL(2-08)01, AL(2-08)02, AL(2-05)01, AL(2-05)02, AL(2-05)03, AL(2- 05)04, AL(2-05)07, AL(2-07)01, AL(2-07)02, AL(2-07)03, AL(2-06)01, AL(2-06)02, AL(2- 06)03, AL(2-06)04, AL(2-04)01, AL(2-02)01, AL(2-02)02, AL(2-02)03, AL(2-02)04, AL(2- 01)01, AL(2-01)02, AL(2-01)03, AL(2-01)04, AL(2-01)05, AL(2-01)06, AL(2-01)07, AL(2- 01)08, AL(2-01)09. Reason: In order to clarify the terms of the consent and to ensure that the development is carried out as permitted.

Development Control Committee 115 of 132 Date printed 9 February 2011

Committee Report Committee Date : 9 February 2011

Printed: 26 January 2011

Case Officer Mr Rhys Bradshaw EN/08/01931/REM

Date received Date valid Overall Expiry Ward Parish 21 October 2008 8 July 2009 7 October 2009 Lower Nene Ashton

Applicant Dr C D Lane

Agent David Jackson

Location Riverside Hotel Station Road Oundle Peterborough Northamptonshire PE8 5LA

Proposal Reserved matters: Erection of hotel, car park and access pursuant to outline planning permission EN/02/00432/RWL dated 9/11/05 (renewal 93/00132/OUT, 96/00384/RWL and 99/00398/VAR)

1. Summary of Recommendation 1.1 That planning permission be GRANTED

2. The Proposal

2.1 This is a reserved matters application for the erection of an 80 bed hotel. Outline planning permission was granted in 1993 (EN/93/132/OUT). Subsequent renewal applications (1996, 1999 and 2002) have ensured that this permission remains extant. The application before Members was submitted within the time limits conditioned under EN/02/00432/RWL. All reserved matters are considered under this application as are details pursuant to all the pre-commencement conditions.

2.2 The proposed hotel would be sited in the northwest corner of the site, close to the boundary with Station Road and in line with the vacant Riverside Public House. The hotel’s north facing side elevation would overlook the road with its main facade facing an internal parking area and the existing building beyond. The other main elevation would abut the banks of the River Nene with the remaining side elevation overlooking newly created meadow grassland and existing mature trees to the south. The raised former railway line would be removed, as would the Ash, Hawthorn and Willow trees that have established themselves along its length. Replacement trees of the same species together with Oak, Hazel, Crab Apple and Spruce would be planted along the eastern boundary with the A605.

2.3 The proposed building would be three storeys high with third floor accommodation in the roof space. To the front of the site, the building would stand some 15m to the ridge but as ground levels fall towards the Nene (west) and A605 (southeast) this height increases to some 16.8m. The footprint of the building would measure 35 x 45m.

2.4 The scheme also includes the repair and reuse of the former public house and associated barn as ancillary accommodation pursuant to condition 5 of the outline consent. This would provide seven staff accommodation units on the ground floor and offices above.

Development Control Committee 116 of 132 Date printed 9 February 2011

2.5 40 parking spaces would be created in the basement and an external car park would accommodate a further 75 spaces and 5 disabled bays. The total parking provision would therefore be 120 spaces.

2.6 It is proposed that the hotel would be constructed from the following materials: • Natural limestone • Blue/black slate • Render • Wooden cladding

2.7 The following reports/ information accompany the application: • Design and Access Statement • Bat Survey • Breeding Bird Survey • Reptile Survey • Noise Exposure Report • Archaeological Desk Based Assessment • Land Contamination Report • Framework Travel Plan

3. The Site and Surroundings 3.1 The site is located on the southern side of Station Road, immediately to the east of the bridge crossing the River Nene. The eastern boundary is defined by the A605 and the river runs along the southern and eastern boundaries. The former Riverside Public House sits in the northeast corner of the site, close to the roundabout junction of Station Road and the A605.

4. Policy Considerations 4.1 National Planning Policy PPS1 Delivering Sustainable Development (incorporating new statement on Climate Change) PPS4 Planning for Sustainable Economic Growth PPS9 Biodiversity and Geological Conservation PPG13 Transport PPS23 Planning and Pollution PPS25 Development and Flood Risk Good Practise Guide on Planning for Tourism

4.2 Regional Spatial Strategy/MKSM Sub-Regional Strategy Policy 23 Regional Priorities for Town Centres and Retail Development On 10th November 2010 the High Court ruled that the Secretary of State's decision to revoke Regional Spatial Strategies was unlawful as it had been taken without primary legislation. A statement was then issued by the Government reiterating their intention to remove RSSs and that this should be treated as a material consideration. However following further legal action the Secretary of State has now agreed that until the further court case in mid January it is for a Local Planning Authority to decide how much weight to attach to the letters that the Government have issued about Regional Spatial Strategies.

4.3 North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy Policy 1 Strengthening the network of settlements Policy 5 Green Infrastructure Policy 6 Infrastructure Delivery and Developer Contributions Policy 8 Delivering Economic Prosperity Policy 9 Distribution and Location of Development

Development Control Committee 117 of 132 Date printed 9 February 2011

Policy13- General Sustainable Development Principles Policy 14 Energy Efficiency and Sustainable Construction 4.4 Rural North Oundle and Thrapston Plan (Inspector’s Modifications 8 July 2009) The Rural North Oundle and Thrapston Plan went through an examination process in 2008 and 2009. Following this examination on 8 July 2009 the Inspector found the document sound. However, as yet the Council has not adopted the Plan as a Development Plan Document as such the Council is still treating the document as emerging policy. Policy 11 – Enhancing Biodiversity.

4.7 Supplementary Guidance NCC SPG Crime and Disorder NCC SPG - Parking. Northamptonshire Place and Movement Guide

5. Planning History 5.1 EN/93/00132/OUT - Hotel (80 bedrooms) car park and access. Granted 5.2 EN/96/00384/RWL - Hotel (80 bedrooms) car park and access (renewal - EN/93/00132/OUT) Granted 5.3 EN/96/00384/RWL - Hotel (80 bedrooms) car park and access (renewal - EN/93/00132/OUT) Granted

6. Consultations and Representations 6.1 Ashton Parish Council – No objections but comments below; There is some conflicting information regarding the landscaping of the area to the south of the complex. It is shown as “uncleared and left as natural wild scrub” but the embankment is shown as being removed and the area landscaped.

It is imperative that more archaeological investigation is carried out. The proximity of the Roman town and the potential for the preservation of environmental archaeology material due to water logged conditions make this investigation extremely important. We appreciate the thoroughness of the desktop survey and trial trenching carried out by Northamptonshire Archaeology. The Nene Valley Archaeological Trust and the Middle Nene Archaeological Group also excavated from 1974-1982 and these bodies are also anxious that no opportunity should be lost to add to the evidence already recovered from this nationally important site

The area to the east of the existing Riverside public house is still part of the highway but it is shown on one plan as an integrated part of the complex with car parking? Is it the intention that this area is to be sold to the developer?

There is some concern that traffic coming from the direction of Thrapston is still approaching the roundabout at more than 40mph and does not take other traffic into sufficient consideration. Is extra signage to be installed to make safer access to the site? Could/should the 40mph zone be extended back to the industrial park? What will happen to the existing bus stop?

6.2 Oundle Town Council – No objection.

6.3 Neighbours: 15 letters of objection were received and can be summarised by the following comments:

• Difficulties reading the plans and understanding the amendments • Objection to the three storey height and general size of the development • Possible future noise nuisance • Impact on parking along Laxton Drive

Development Control Committee 118 of 132 Date printed 9 February 2011

• Impact on entrance to the Old Station House • Exit/entrance onto Station Road could have highway safety implications • Boundary wall should be rebuilt • Impact on bus stops • Request a condition to control lighting

• The change in height is beneficial but still substantially greater in height than the existing building on the site to which it should relate. There is little change to the mass. • Whilst the proposed size and number of window/door openings has been reduced the design concept and rationale remains muddled. The proposal neither represents a traditional mill nor relates to the scale, proportion and detail of the existing building on or buildings nearby the site. The design appears to be generated purely by the requirement to achieve 80 bedrooms, meeting and conference facilities etc within a single square block to achieve the minimum construction cost.

6.4 Northamptonshire Police Crime Prevention Design Advisor This applicant has failed to fully demonstrate in the Design and Access statement what measures have been applied to help prevent crime/incidents occurring. The only reference is regarding the below ground level vehicle parking ingress/egress and the CCTV monitoring of. Section 17 of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998 requires the District Council consider the crime and disorder implications in all its activities and in addition the North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy, adopted June 2008, states - Policy 13 (b), 'Seek to Design out antisocial behaviour, crime and reduce the fear of crime by applying the principles of the Secured By Design scheme', this criteria should be followed and conditions applied where appropriate to up-hold this strategy guidance. I therefore am not convinced that the requirements of the North Northamptonshire 'Core Spatial Strategy' Policy 13 nor the NNJPU SPD 'Sustainable Design' Sec 2 Continuity and Enclosure have been met. Design and access statements should demonstrate how crime prevention measures have been considered in the design of the proposal and how the design reflects the attributes of safe, sustainable places set out in Safer Places - the Planning System and Crime Prevention. A D&A that addresses crime enables the applicant to demonstrate to the planning authority an awareness of the potential crime/incidents on the proposed site and, importantly, shows precisely what measures are being taken to help alleviate these problems. I make the following comments/observations: • I recommend a full crime prevention statement be submitted outlining the proposed security measures. • Lighting details need to be submitted and agreed by the LPA in consultation with the police to ensure safety and security. It should help achieve the operational requirement of the CCTV system, in terms of sufficient illumination and colour rendering. • Access control to all non general public/restricted areas needs to be effectively controlled. This should include both the main hotel and the redeveloped Riverside public house building. • CCTV needs to be installed both externally and internally to help prevent and detect potential incidents. The system needs to be fully fit for purpose and meet all operational requirements. • Boundary treatments need to fully detailed and approved by the LPA in consultation with the police. • Vulnerable areas i.e. office's, reception desk and stores should have enhanced security for the provision of vulnerable goods including cash. • Fire doors should be individually alarmed, with localised isolation, particularly in remote areas to prevent unauthorised access. • The Car Park should be in compliance and ideally achieve the Safer Parking Scheme award. This is an initiative of the Associations of Chief Police Officers aimed at reducing crime and the fear of crime in parking facilities.

Development Control Committee 119 of 132 Date printed 9 February 2011

6.5 Environment Agency: Support the discharge of conditions 13 and 14 of EN/02/000432/RWL (river access and levels) It is strongly recommended that your Authority seeks further advice from your Emergency Planner and/or other organisations that are better placed to advice on the issues of evacuation and rescue specifically with regards to a flood and emergency evacuation plan. The Environment Agency does not normally comment on or approve the adequacy of flood emergency and evacuation procedures accompanying development proposals, as we do not carry out these roles during a flood. Our involvement with this development during an emergency will be limited to delivering flood warnings to occupants/users. Planning Policy Statement 25 and the associated Practice Guide (paragraphs 7.23 to 7.31) places responsibilities on Local Planning Authorities (LPAs) to consult their Emergency Planners and the Emergency Services with regard to specific emergency planning issues relating to new development

6.6 Anglian Water: Obliged to provide water and wastewater infrastructure for employment developments when requested to do so. Recommend informatives to developer to ensure compliance with the Water Industry Act.

6.7 English Heritage: The proposed development site lies adjacent to Scheduled Ancient Monument (SAM) NN169, which comprises the buried remains of an extensive Roman settlement. I note that an archaeological evaluation has been carried out at the proposed development site (Northamptonshire archaeology report 09/60) and that two evaluation trenches failed to locate buried remains associated with the Roman settlement. However, it is clear that the trenching was inhibited by on-site constraints. The eastern side of the proposed development site, the part closest to the SAM, including a Roman cemetery, was not fully investigated. Furthermore, the evaluation did not achieve a meaningful sample of the terrain beneath the undated alluvial deposits, which could seal significant archaeological features.

There remains a possibility that significant archaeological features survive beneath parts of the proposed development site, although these are only likely to be damaged by construction excavations below current site surface levels. Therefore it would be appropriate to seek further advice from your expert archaeological advisor who may well recommend that a facility to ensure preservation in situ beneath new construction levels or archaeological recording, as necessary should be applied to a planning consent.

The appropriateness of the of the scale of the proposed hotel building and its relationship to the nearby Grade II listed buildings and Conservation Area, previously noted by my former colleague should be addressed in accordance with national and local guidance and your specialist conservation advice.

We would urge you to address the above issues and recommend that the application should be determined in accordance with national and local guidance and your specialist conservation advice. It is not necessary for us to be consulted again.

6.8 NCC Rights of Way: No objection 6.9 NCC Highways: Would not promote the construction of a stone boundary wall on highway land as pedestrian access should be available. Any such feature will require the written approval of the highway authority should planning permission be granted.

Development Control Committee 120 of 132 Date printed 9 February 2011

Suggested conditions: • Vehicle access and parking areas to be hard surfaced prior to occupation • Closure of existing access • Engineering details for the means of access • Submission of a Travel Plan

6.10 Natural England: No comments received. 6.11 Northants Bat Group: Fully agree with the findings of the bat report. 6.12 The Ramblers Association: No comments to make 6.13 North Northants Badger Group: No comments to make

6.14 ENC Design Officer Since I wrote my memo in respect of the original scheme, I have been involved in discussions aimed at improving the overall design of the proposal, and address the concerns stated. I will set out below my comments in respect of the revisions made.

Layout In my original memo, I noted the potential of the site, and suggested that the arrangement and orientation of the building did not maximise the benefit of some opportunities; including for example, views toward Oundle town centre and specifically the church spire. This matter has been subsequently discussed, and the applicant was resistant to amending this element of the design. As a result, the arrangement of space and the orientation of the building remain essentially unchanged. I remain of the view that altering the footprint, layout and orientation of the building could have potential benefits in respect of the above, and could serve to reduce the overall mass and bulk of the hotel (see below). I would have liked to have seen this option explored.

Notwithstanding the above however, I recognise that several changes have been made to the building, which I consider to enhance the outlook from the building, as well as having benefits for the external appearance. These include altering the proportions of the window openings, and the introduction of balcony space on ‘elevation K’ which would enhance the opportunity for views toward Oundle.

Built form The overall mass of the proposed hotel and its relationship with the existing building on site were elements that I was critical about in my original memo. These were among the reasons why I was keen to encourage revisions to the arrangement of space and orientation of the building as set out above. Having decided not to consider revisions in respect of layout, discussions focussed on methods of reducing the overall height of the buildings to create an improved relationship with the existing Riverside building, and creating some vertical emphasis to reduce the perceived width of the hotel elevations.

The overall height of the building as proposed has been reduced, with rooms in the upper floor having dormer windows. The window proportions have also been altered to better reflect those of the existing building. This is intended to create an improved visual relationship with the existing riverside building, though I note that no revised street scene drawings have been submitted to demonstrate this. In order to fully assess this I would like to see a revised street scene drawing.

Vertical emphasis in the elevations has been incorporated through amending the window proportions and ensuring they are vertically aligned. In addition, an extra gable has been added to elevation J, and elements reminiscent of mill luca have been incorporated on all elevations.

Development Control Committee 121 of 132 Date printed 9 February 2011

The overall mass would be further broken visually by the introduction of different materials, including render and timber. Whilst I support this approach in principle, I would like to see samples of the timber finish in particular, and am of the view that a natural rather than dark stained finish would better complement the other materials proposed.

Conclusion I am disappointed that alternative layout options have not been explored, as I am of the view that a robust rationale for this arrangement; based on the specific opportunities and constraints of this site; has not been put forward. However, I do recognise that the applicant has incorporated several changes as outlined above, which in my view represent significant improvements on the original scheme by serving to visually break down the overall bulk of the building. This comment is made however, without a revised street scene drawing which should be provided to demonstrate a satisfactory relationship with the existing building on the site.

Later comments on revised street scene drawing: I am satisfied that this demonstrates an acceptable relationship between the existing and proposed built form.

6.15 The scheme now presented on the plans referenced: 315-19 and 315-21 shows a more comprehensive design, sympathetic to the character of the surrounding area. While the open nature of the revised design is now at an acceptable level with appropriate species selected, I would suggest that we need clarification on planting densities and stock sizes for all new planting and particularly for the new tree planting. This will help to ensure that appropriate planting stock is used in the various areas throughout the site and meadow.

If possible, I would suggest that we secure the future submission and agreement of this information by way of a planning condition.

7. Evaluation The following issues are relevant to the determination of this application:

7.1 Principle of development in this location 7.1.1 The principle of a hotel on this site has been established by 1993 outline planning permission and subsequent renewal applications in 1996 and 2002. This current application seeks permission for the remaining matters of landscaping, appearance, scale and siting.

7.1.2 PPS1 refers to the need for sustainable economic development. It sets out a positive approach to delivering sustainable economic development, including recognising its environmental and social benefits and ensuring that suitable locations are available (paragraphs 23(i) and 23(iii)). The more recently published PPS4 provides further guidance and advises in policy EC10.1 that planning applications that secure sustainable economic growth should be treated favourably.

7.1.3 MKSM Northamptonshire Policy 1: The Spatial Framework, in RSS8, identifies that beyond the main urban centres (such as Corby, Wellingborough and Kettering) development should be focused in smaller towns, such as Rushden, Higham Ferrers and Irthlingborough and the smaller service centres of Oundle, Raunds and Thrapston.

Development Control Committee 122 of 132 Date printed 9 February 2011

7.1.4 Policies 8, 9 and 11 of the Core Spatial Strategy set out the overall locational strategy for new employment development across North Northamptonshire. Policy 9 specifies that priority will be given to development in urban areas.

7.1.5 The Good Practise Guide on Planning for Tourism provides further advice in respect of hotel development in Annex A. In paragraph 3 it stresses that for major hotels (those with business, conference and banqueting facilities, or large hotels catering for tourists) sites should be in town centres. In paragraph 4 it highlights that planning authorities need to recognise that the particular market being met by the accommodation may influence the nature of the location chosen. For example, it suggests that accommodation for those seeking to enjoy the natural environment through walking and outdoor recreation may be better located in the rural area or a village rather than in a major town centre some distance away from the attraction it serves. Paragraphs 13- 16 provide advice for budget hotels, motels and travel lodges (other than those intended to be occupied for more than one night which cater for visitors to historic towns and cities). It recognises that these cater for car bourne traffic and that the preference of developers will be on major traffic routes outside of the centre of large towns or tourist centres. The guidance suggests that such development should still be as sustainable as possible and that edge of town centre sites will usually be the most appropriate rather than sites in the open countryside.

7.2 Means of Access and Highway Safety 7.2.1 A Framework Travel Plan accompanies the application. In addition, further information was submitted at the request of the Highway Authority.

The Highway Authority has requested that conditions be imposed to ensure the following: • Vehicle access and parking areas to be hard surfaced prior to occupation • Closure of existing access • Engineering details for the means of access • Submission of a Travel Plan

This requested is noted; however, conditions on the original outline consent (EN/02/00432/RWL) cover these points. Some of the requested details have already been submitted in order to discharge these conditions, notably the travel plan (which requires a slight amendment to reflect the actual number of parking spaces), engineering details and closure of the existing access. These are considered acceptable and can be discharged concurrently with this application should Members resolve to approve it.

Neighbour concerns regarding parking on Laxton Drive is noted, however the parking provision on site is in excess of the one space per bedroom in the Parking SPG. The more recent Place and Movement Guide advises primarily on residential schemes and does not set levels for this type of development Concerns regarding access and egress are also noted. The submitted engineering details show a ghosted right turn lane specifically for the development as well as adequate visibility in both directions. These details are acceptable to the Highway Authority.

7.3 The Layout and Design of the Proposed Development: 7.3.1 The application is accompanied by a revised Design and Access Statement which explains the principles behind the development and the amendments made to its design since originally submitted. The initial proposals suggested that the building had been designed with ‘simple shapes’ to reflect ‘mill style’ buildings. From the evidence within the application, the Councils’ Design Officer was not convinced that the form or appearance of the proposal was reflective of a mill and questioned the merit in such an aspiration given that there are existing listed water mills in the area. The height and

Development Control Committee 123 of 132 Date printed 9 February 2011

general massing also raised concern, not just as a stand alone building but also the impact on street scene when read in conjunction with the existing Riverside public house.

7.3.2 Revisions were submitted in response to Officer concerns. Whilst the applicant was not willing to change the plan form of the building and there is no doubt that the hotel would be dominant in the street scene, the amendments do serve to break up the mass of the building, using large gables on the two main elevations as well as ‘luca’ features; cantilevered wooden structures often associated with mill and wharf type buildings. The ridge height has been also been reduced when compared to the original proposal, with the rooms on the third floor being accommodated in the roof with dormer windows. The overall mass would be further broken visually by the introduction of different materials, including render and timber. These details would need to be controlled by a further condition as the outline application referred to facing brink and slate only.

7.3.3 The window proportions throughout the building have been altered to better reflect those of the existing Riverside building and go some way to improving the visual relationship between the two. The amendments to the fenestration to make them longer and narrower than originally proposed and add a vertical emphasis to the building

7.4 Effect on Residential Amenity 7.4.1 There are no residential properties within the immediate vicinity of the proposed hotel. The nearest property on Laxton Drive is situated approximately 85m to the northwest, which is sufficient to prevent undue levels of overlooking from hotel bedroom windows and would also prevent the building having an overbearing impact on these properties.

7.4.2 Neighbours have raised the issue of lighting and noise nuisance, both of which are covered by conditions attached to the outline consent. One of these conditions prohibits live or amplified music outside the building, whilst the other requires the submission of a noise assessment in accordance with PPG24. An assessment has been submitted but requires additional information. Whilst this is so, the application considered here can still be determined as the Council retains adequate control though this condition.

7.5 Ecology 7.5.1 Natural England has not provided any comments on the additional protected species surveys required by condition 22 of the outline planning permission. The submitted reptile survey found no evidence of reptiles on this site. The Northants Bat Group agree with the findings of the Bat Survey, which advises further surveys during the months of June, July and September and the application for a European Protected Species Licence. The submission of these additional surveys can be ensured by a further condition.

7.6 Rights of Way 7.6.1 There are no rights of way through the site.

7.7 Contamination 7.7.1 The applicant proposes to remove the former railway embankment rather than reuse the material on site. The Council’s Environmental Protection Officer is satisfied with this approach.

7.8 Drainage and Flooding. 7.8.1 The Environment Agency is satisfied that the information submitted pursuant to the discharge the relevant conditions on the outline consent is now acceptable.

Development Control Committee 124 of 132 Date printed 9 February 2011

7.8.2 The Environment Agency has advised that the Council seeks further advice from our Emergency Planner and/or other organisations to advise on the issues of evacuation and rescue specifically with regards to a flood and emergency evacuation plan. In this regard, Officers have sought the advice of the both the County Planner and our own Emergency Planner, who have agreed that this information can be sought through a condition prior to commencement of development.

7.8.3 Anglian Water have advised that there is capacity in the water supply and foul sewerage networks to serve this development.

7.9 Archaeology: 7.9.1Northamptonshire Archaeology were commissioned to carry out investigative work prior to submission. The investigation involved the digging to two trial trenches to identify the extent of Roman deposits related to the adjacent Scheduled Ancient Monument, which is severed from the site by the A605. Their report concludes that no archaeological deposits or features were encountered during the course of the trial excavation, nor were any artefacts recovered. The report also states that given the close proximity of the development area to the River Nene and the consequences of erosion and flooding, and the disturbance from the construction of the railway embankment down the centre of the site, it is likely that any archaeological remains within the development area would have been destroyed or truncated. The report does highlight that there is potential for remains to survive along the eastern edge of the development area, where trial trenching was not practicable.

7.9.2 Further correspondence from Northamptonshire Archaeology confirms that the area most likely to contain remains lies to the south east of the existing outbuilding, beneath the old road surface and the embankment of the A605. It is the consultant’s view that the proposed development will have minimal impact on this area as it had been designated for car parking and landscaping. Furthermore, they advise that the construction of the old road and associated drains etc will have caused significant truncation and disturbance of sub-surface deposits. In light of this view and taking into account the advice from English Heritage, NCC Archaeology and the Councils own Planning Policy and Conservation Assistant, Officers are of the view that a condition requiring a watching brief during construction should be imposed on any consent.

7.10 Landscaping 7.10.1The Council’s Conservation Officer had previously objected to the landscaping scheme as originally submitted because it would have separated the wider scrub area from the more formal area close to the building by planting a hedge across the site. There was also some concern about the species and number of trees to be removed. Revised landscaping details have overcome these concerns by removing the formal hedge from the scheme and proposing additional tree planting along the eastern boundary with the A605. These species have been agreed with both the Wildlife Trust. The Conservation does however suggest that planting densities and stock sizes for all new planting be secured by condition

8 Other matters 8.1 Crime and Disorder: The Crime Prevention Officer identifies several issues that need to be addressed. An amended Design and Access Statement is due to be submitted, which will detail how the applicant proposes to address these issues.

Development Control Committee 125 of 132 Date printed 9 February 2011

9 Conclusions 9.1 In recommending this application for approval, the relevant planning guidance and policies were identified as PPS1, PPS4, PPS9, PPG13, PPS23 and PPS25, East Midlands Regional Plan Policy 23 and North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy 2008 policies 1, 6, 7, 9, 10, 14, 13 and 14. Having regard to these, the representations received and any other material planning reasons, the main issues were identified as the principle of the development, the impact on neighbouring amenities, the design and visual impact, highway matters, ecology, archaeology and landscaping. The application has been recommended for approval as: • The principle of the development is acceptable and is consistent with the development plan. • The proposal represents the best use of land in an existing settlement. • The proposal would not have an unacceptable impact on the local highway. • The development would not harm the visual amenity or character of the area. • The proposal would not have a significant impact on the amenities of neighbouring occupiers • The development would have an acceptable impact on archaeology on site. • The proposal would have an acceptable impact on protected species.

10 Recommendation 10.1 It is recommended that the application be GRANTED subject to the following conditions:

Conditions/Reasons -

1. The development hereby permitted shall be carried out strictly in accordance with the approved plans:

• OLT001/01 P1, 315/01, 315/12, 315/13 and 315/15 received by the Local Planning Authority on 21/10/08 • 315/02, 315/03 received by the Local Planning Authority on 20/07/09 • 315/05A, 315/06A, 315/07A sheets 1-3, 315/08A, 315/16B, 315/19, 315/20, 315/21 received by the Local Planning Authority on 09/02/10 • 315/09A, 315/10A and 315/11A received by the Local Planning Authority on 16/03/10 unless otherwise agreed in writing by the local planning authority. Reason: In order to clarify the terms of the planning permission and to ensure that the development is carried out as permitted

2. Notwithstanding the submitted details, prior to the commencement of the development hereby permitted, details and samples of the external roofing and facing materials to be used for the construction of the hotel shall have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall thereafter be implemented in accordance with the details so approved, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To achieve a satisfactory appearance for the development.

3. The measures identified in section 7 of the Bat Survey undertaken by Greenwillows Associates Ltd dated May 2009 shall be implemented prior to the commencement of development. Reason: To ensure the protection of protected species.

Development Control Committee 126 of 132 Date printed 9 February 2011

4. Prior to the commencement of the development hereby permitted, a flood and emergency evacuation plan shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The plan shall be in accordance with FRA Guidance for new Developments FD2320 Reason: To ensure that appropriate evacuation measures are in place

5. Prior to the commencement of the development hereby permitted, details of the planting densities and stock sizes for all new planting shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The landscaping shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details prior to the development being first brought into use. Reason: To ensure a reasonable standard of development.

6. A watching brief shall be undertaken during the development hereby permitted. Details of the brief shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority prior to the commencement of works, and the appropriate recording shall take place if any archaeology is discovered. Reason: To safeguard the adequate investigation of any archaeological remains which may be present within the site.

Informatives

1. In approving this application, the relevant planning guidance and policies were identified as PPS1, PPS4, PPS9, PPG13, PPS23 and PPS25, East Midlands Regional Plan Policy 23 and North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy 2008 policies 1, 6, 7, 9, 10, 14, 13 and 14. Having regard to these, the representations received and any other material planning reasons, the main issues were identified as the principle of the development, the impact on neighbouring amenities, the design and visual impact, highway matters, ecology, archaeology and landscaping. The application has been approved as: • The principle of the development is acceptable and is consistent with the development plan. • The proposal represents the best use of land in an existing settlement. • The proposal would not have an unacceptable impact on the local highway. • The development would not harm the visual amenity or character of the area. • The proposal would not have a significant impact on the amenities of neighbouring occupiers • The development would have an acceptable impact on archaeology on site. • The proposal would have an acceptable impact on protected species.

Development Control Committee 127 of 132 Date printed 9 February 2011

Committee Report Committee Date : 9 February 2011 Printed: 28 January 2011

Case Officer Carolyn Tait EN/10/02012/FUL

Date received Date valid Overall Expiry Ward Parish 29 October 2010 29 October 2010 24 December 2010 Woodford Great Addington

Applicant Mr C Robinson

Agent Peter Philpin Design

Location Kenmore Grange Cranford Road Great Addington Kettering Northamptonshire NN14 4BH

Proposal Erection of shed and pet enclosure (Retrospective)

This application is brought before Development Control Committee at the request of the local Councillor, following a ward member consultation.

1 Summary of Recommendation

1.1 That permission be GRANTED subject to conditions.

2. The Proposal

2.1 The application proposes the erection of a shed and a pet enclosure. This is a retrospective application. 2.2 The shed which is used as a hobby workshop, is located within the eastern part of the application site and measures approximately 4.3 metres in width by 7 metres in length by 3.2 metres in height and is constructed from timber with a felt roof. 2.3 The pet enclosure is located within the northern part of the application site and measures approximately 4.8 metres in width by 4.8 metres in length by 3.4 metres in height and is used to house lemurs. It is constructed from timber with a felt roof.

3 The Site and Surroundings

3.1 The application site accommodates a two storey detached property with a number of extensions. Within the site there is also a number of outbuildings which are used to house pets, such as monkeys. 3.2 The site is located on the edge of Great Addington. 3.3 There is residential development of mixed character and style to the south and east of the site and open countryside surrounds the remainder. 3.4 The site is adjacent a grade II listed building at Great Addington House.

4 Policy Considerations

4.1 National Planning Policy Guidance PPS1– Sustainable Development PPS5 – Planning for the Historic Environment

Development Control Committee 128 of 132 Date printed 9 February 2011

4.2 East Midlands Regional Plan Policy 2 – Promoting Better Design On 10th November 2010 the High Court ruled that the Secretary of State's decision to revoke Regional Spatial Strategies was unlawful as it had been taken without primary legislation. A statement was then issued by the Government reiterating their intention to remove RSSs and that this should be treated as a material consideration. However following further legal action the Secretary of State has now agreed that until the further court case in mid January it is for a Local Planning Authority to decide how much weight to attach to the letters that the Government have issued about Regional Spatial Strategies. 4.3 North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy Policy 13 – General Sustainable Development Principles 4.4 Supplementary Planning Guidance Residential Extensions and Alterations Design Guide, Oct 1998 4.5 Other Documents None relevant

5 Relevant Planning History

5.1 08/01265/FUL Proposed single storey front extension (porch) and single storey rear extension. PERMITTED.

6 Consultations and Representations

6.1 Neighbours: Comments received from Willow Garth, Gardeners Cottage and Huxloe House and can be summarised as: • The proposed workshop is extremely visible from Huxloe House and backs onto the garden, dominating it. Due to the difference in land levels it is over 3.5 metres high. It would appear less prominent if the side elevation of the pitched roof were facing the garden rather than the gable end. Could the Council negotiate with the applicant to reduce the height of this workshop or to clad the elevation with some trellis and to plant some climbing shrubs. • Noise nuisance. • Smells. • More buildings means more animals and more problems. • Are the animals licensed? 6.2 Parish Council: Objection received. Reasons can be summarised as: • May not accurately represent the development that has taken place within the site. • Risk to public safety if any of the animals escape. • Noise nuisance. • Security lights. • Odours. • Pests. 6.3 Environmental Protection Officer: Comments received that there are no obvious environmental issues apparent at this time. 6.4 Site Notice posted: 26 November 2010 on post at the entrance to the site.

7 Evaluation

7.1 The following considerations are relevant to the determination of this application:

7.2 Visual impact

Development Control Committee 129 of 132 Date printed 9 February 2011

7.2.1 The hobby workshop and pet enclosure are not visible from the street scene and as such do not result in a detrimental visual impact upon it. As they are not visible from any public viewpoint, they do not result in a detrimental visual impact to the character and appearance of the surrounding area. 7.2.2 The materials used are typical of outbuildings situated within a garden of a residential property and therefore the buildings do not appear out of keeping with the existing dwelling and do not result in a detrimental visual impact.

7.3 Neighbouring amenity

7.3.1 The nearest properties to the development include Great Addington House, Willow Garth, Huxloe House, Brignall House and Stonelea. All other properties are far enough away not to be impacted upon. 7.3.2 Comments are noted from the occupiers of Huxloe House regarding the visibility of the hobby workshop from their property. Whilst approximately one metre of the top of the shed/outbuilding is visible, it does not form a prominent feature that would result in overshadowing or overbearing to any of the windows or private amenity space of this neighbouring property. The distance between the hobby workshop and Huxloe House is approximately 50 metres and this distance is sufficient to prevent any undue harm to residential amenity. 7.3.3 Brignall House and Stonelea are located approximately 45 metres away from the hobby workshop and Rush Glen Cottage is located approximately 40 metres away. These distances are sufficient to prevent any undue harm to residential amenity. 7.3.4 There are no windows within the hobby workshop that face any neighbouring properties and as such there are no issues of overlooking form this building. 7.3.5 Willow Garth is located approximately 35 metres away from the pet enclosure. This distance is sufficient to prevent any undue harm to residential amenity. As the building is used to house lemurs, there would be no issues of overlooking caused.

7.4 Environmental Issues

7.4.1 Concern has been expressed regarding noise, odour and pests as a result of the use of the buildings. The Council’s Environmental Protection Officer has commented that there are no obvious environmental issues apparent at this time. Many of the neighbours concerns relate to existing animals on the site which are not housed in the two buildings which form part of this application, and therefore these concerns are not relevant to the determination of this application. Should concerns be raised, this matter can be investigated by Environmental Protection under the relevant regulations. 7.4.2 Comments have been noted regarding security lighting, however, lighting has not been indicated within the application and therefore is not relevant to the determination of this application.

8 Other issues

8.1 Crime and Disorder - this application does not raise any significant issues. 8.2 Access for Disabled - these buildings are not subject to any public access and therefore does not raise any significant issues. 8.3 Comments have been noted about further development taking place within the site. This development does not form part of this application and therefore can not be determined as part of it. These buildings will be the subject of a separate investigation. 8.4 Neighbours comments have been received regarding a need for a license to house animals. However, this is not relevant to planning and can be controlled by other legislation and therefore does not form a material consideration. However, a license was given to the applicant in January 2011 to house;

Development Control Committee 130 of 132 Date printed 9 February 2011

• nine Ring Tailed Lemurs, • two Black Capped Capuchins, • eleven Crab Eating Macaques, • two Stump Tail Macaques and • two White Fronted Brown Lemurs This license is for a residential property and not for commercial use and as such the animals that are kept are ancillary to the enjoyment of the residential dwelling. This license does not allow for any more animals to be kept at the site other than what is stated and only applies to a residential premise. 8.5 The neighbours at Huxloe House have asked for the development to be amended to reduce the impact to their property. Unless this is necessary in order to approve a scheme that would otherwise be refused, the local planning authority is required to determine the application as submitted. 8.6 Comments have been made regarding the possibility of animals escaping. This is not a material planning consideration and it is controlled by the licence.

9 Conclusion

In recommending this application for approval, the relevant planning guidance and policies were identified as PPS1, East Midlands Regional Plan policy 2 and the North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy policy 13. Having regard to these, the representations received and any other material planning reasons, the main issues were identified as the visual impact, the impact on neighbouring amenity and environmental issues. The application has been recommended for approval as:

1. The buildings would not be visible from the street scene and as such would not result in a detrimental visual impact to the character and appearance of the surrounding area. 2. The proposal would not have a significant impact on the amenities of neighbouring occupiers. 3.There are no obvious environmental issues apparent at this time.

10 Recommendation

10.1 That the application be GRANTED subject to the following conditions:

11 Conditions/Reasons -

1. This permission relates only to the retention of development carried out on or before 6 January 2011. Reason: In order to clarify the precise terms of this planning permission.

2. The development hereby permitted shall be carried out strictly in accordance with the approved plans received by the Local Planning Authority on 29 October 2010, drawing numbers: 1 OS Sitemap at a scale of 1:1250 and 2 Plans and elevations, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the local planning authority. Reason: In order to clarify the terms of the planning permission and to ensure that the development is carried out as permitted.

Development Control Committee 131 of 132 Date printed 9 February 2011

12 Informatives

1. In approving this application, the relevant planning guidance and policies were identified as PPS1, East Midlands Regional Plan policy 2 and the North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy policy 13. Having regard to these, the representations received and any other material planning reasons, the main issues were identified as the visual impact, the impact on neighbouring amenity and environmental issues. The application has been approved as:

1. The buildings would not be visible from the street scene and as such would not result in a detrimental visual impact to the character and appearance of the surrounding area. 2. The proposal would not have a significant impact on the amenities of neighbouring occupiers. 3. There are no obvious environmental issues apparent at this time.

Development Control Committee 132 of 132 Date printed 9 February 2011