Regulatory Committee Wednesday 21 June 2006 at 7.00Pm Council Chamber, Swanspool House

. Swanspool House Wellingborough Borough Council of NN8 1BP

Wellingborough 13th June 2006

Regulatory Committee Wednesday 21st June 2006 at 7.00pm Council Chamber, Swanspool House

AGENDA

1. Apologies for absence.

Ι 2. Declarations of Interest (if any).

Ι 3. Confirmation of the minutes of the meeting held on 24/5/2006.

Ι 4. Applications for planning permission, building regulation approval etc. 5 Any other business that the Chairman decides is urgent.

Ι Enclosed

Please note: Site Viewing Group for Tuesday 20th June 2006 will be Councillors Beirne, Morrall, Palmer and Waters.

Lyn Martin-Bennison

Chief Executive

Membership: Councillor Waters (Chairman), Councillor Morrall (Vice- Chairman), Councillors Beirne, Dholakia, L Lawman, Mann, Old, Palmer, Patel, Ryan, Smith, Timms and Ward.

For further copies of agenda and reports contact Performance and Democratic Services 01933 231511.

Borough Council of Wellingborough Regulatory Committee Wednesday 21st June 2006 at 7.00 pm Council Chamber, Swanspool House

INDEX

Page No. SITE VIEWING GROUP

WP/2006/0135/F - 1 Westminster Road, Wellingborough. 1 WP/2006/0142/F - 5-7 Albert Road, Wellingborough. 4 WP/2006/0153/O - Land at 152 London Road, Wollaston. 8 WP/2006/0189/F - Land adjacent Lymehurst, The Avenue, Wellingborough. 15 WP/2006/0253/F - Land off Church Way, Grendon. 21 WP/2006/0257/F - 156 Station Road, Irchester. 29

DISTRICT

WP/2005/0527/O - Land at 53 Station Road, Earls Barton. 32 WP/2006/0093/F - Land to the east of Furnace Lane, Finedon Sidings, Little Harrowden. 40 WP/2006/0148/RM - Land adjacent to 22 Regent Street, Finedon. 46 WP/2006/0170/F - Land adjoining 5 South Street, Isham. 50 WP/2006/0176/F - Krohne Limited, Rutherford Drive, Park Farm Industrial Estate, Wellingborough. 55 WP/2006/0184/F - 62 Main Street, Little Harrowden, Wellingborough. 60 WP/2006/0191/O 96 Northampton Road, Wellingborough. 63 WP/2006/0231/O - Land adjacent to 16 Cromer Road, Finedon. 69 WP/2006/0235/F - Sheltered Accommodation, Perkins Court, Bell Street, Wellingborough. 72 WP/2006/0240/O - Land adjacent 107 Valley Road, Wellingborough. 74

FOR INFORMATION

WP/2005/0584/C - Land to the West of the Village of Isham, A509, Isham. 77 WP/2006/0102/C - Victoria Infant School, Finedon Road, Wellingborough. 82

1 BOROUGH COUNCIL OF WELLINGBOROUGH AGENDA ITEM

SITE VIEWING (Date of visit 20th June 2006 at 3.00 p.m.)

Regulatory Committee 21/06/2006

Report of the Executive Director

APPLICATION REF: WP/2006/0135/F

PROPOSAL: Single storey extensions to original bungalow - car port, lounge and dining extensions (retrospective application).

LOCATION: 1 Westminster Road, Wellingborough.

APPLICANT: Mr and Mrs W J Purcell.

A visit by Site Viewing is suggested by a Member because of the possible implications the development may have on the neighbouring properties amenity.

PROPOSAL AND DESCRIPTION OF SITE: The property is a single storey dwelling located off the unclassified Westminster Road, which is flanked by the classified Kilborn Road, it is located approximately 2 miles north of Wellingborough Town Centre and forms a development of similar single storey properties and detached properties built in the mid 1970’s. The extensions are existing and include an extension to the rear and a car port to the side.

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY: No relevant planning history.

NATIONAL AND LOCAL PLANNING POLICY: Borough of Wellingborough Local Plan Policy G1.

SUMMARY OF REPLIES TO CONSULTATIONS/REPRESENTATIONS RECEIVED: 1. Highways (NCC) – recommends that the highway standards and planning conditions set out in the NCC document ‘Minor Planning Applications that have an effect on the highway’ be applied to this application.

2. Occupier – 3 Westminster Road, Wellingborough – Summary

• I do not object to extensions to the lounge and dining room’ • Noise from development and from the car port acting as an ‘echo-chamber’ • Concerns over possible damp and problems in repairing eaves as a result of the car port • De-valuation of property • Concerns that they are becoming semi-detached properties

ASSESSMENT: Affect upon Neighbours Amenity The side carport is to project no further forward than the existing property and therefore there is no increased loss of amenity to properties fronting the site than exists at N

3 488100 8 488300

2 1 6 882

0 ( ( 269100 269100 OAD TMINSTER R WES El Sub Sta

1 Posts 7

( ( 2 2 4 7

1 3 1 Y

TUDOR WA 6

5 0

4 6 4

1 2 2

B ( LB l a

5 d

o 2

n 7

W 2

l k

10 4

8 1 32 1

0 42

CK CLOSE

WOODSTO

2 7

5 AY 6 TUDOR W

6 5

B 690 690 W

4 4 l 3

y E 2 3

d 6

2 S 8 o 1

2 n 3 T

W 4 1

1 2 3 a 0

2 l I k N

R (

TCB R

KILBORN ROAD

h at P

689 689

7 8 7 82 4 62a 70 64 80 66 a 76 62 72 b 6 8 64b 58b 60b 58a 60a

(d ( |

6 OMER Y 7 5 6 F

ORD ROAD

1 4 Red Well

(dis)

2 6

1 2

4 4

1 5

4 268800 4 268800

10 4 2

3 b

8 b

488100 488300

4 D 4

D 882 4 2

EV a ONSH a IRE C LOSE Scale 1:1250

8 1

h 1 t El a P

e Sub Sta l 7 c 1 y C

3 2 present. There is open highway land to the south/side of the site with open recreational land beyond. The rear extensions and carport are obscured from the view of 1 Kilborn Road to the rear of the site by the garage which existed prior to the building of the extensions. The extension to the rear of the site fills in the gap which existed between the garage and the application property, therefore due to the existence of the garage the loss of light has not increased, with the extension largely hidden from view behind the garage. There are no windows in the southern side elevation of the property, with the carport spanning the driveway space between the properties. It is therefore considered that there are no loss of light or overlooking issues with regard this application and an additional noise is not sufficient to justify refusal, therefore the proposal is in accordance with Policy G1 of the Local Plan.

Loss of Amenity Space The carport represents no loss of amenity space as it involves the covering of the existing driveway. Although the extension has resulted in a loss of rear amenity space leaving a garden length of 8m which is contrary to SPG VIII: Building Better Places for a minimum garden length of 10.5m the garden length to the side, however is 12m, which is in line with guidance and therefore does not lend itself to refusal of the application.

Character and Setting of Locality As the property is of no particular architectural importance similarly the neighbouring properties the proposed works will not be to the detriment of the character of the property or the area it is located in.

Planning Out Crime Implications Having consulted Supplementary Planning Guidance IV: Planning Out Crime in Northamptonshire there are no crime implications with regard the extension as the rear extension has meant that the rear garden is enclosed and access cannot be gained other than through the property, which is encouraged.

Highway Implications The extension is to go no closer to the highway than the existing dwelling therefore there is no increased implications to the safety and convenience of highway, there is also no loss of off street parking. Therefore having consulted the NCC document, ‘Minor Planning Applications that have an effect on the highway’ be applied to this application, there are no highway grounds for refusal of this application.

Response to Representations The advice given by the highways authority has been taken into account and the relevant guidance applied as discussed above. The comments from the neighbour has been taken into account when making a recommendation and discussed above although the de-valuing of the property and access to gable end are not considered material planning considerations.

Summary Having considered the above, there are no material planning considerations to justify refusal of this application and is therefore in accordance with Policy G1, and highway guidance and is hereby recommended for approval.

RECOMMENDATION: Approve. No conditions needed as it is a retrospective application.

3 INFORMATIVE/S Pursuant to Section 38 (6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004, the proposed development complies with the applicable development plan policies and there are no other material considerations that would constitute sustainable grounds for refusal. These include specifically the following policy: G1 of the Borough of Wellingborough Local Plan. 4

BOROUGH COUNCIL OF WELLINGBOROUGH AGENDA ITEM

SITE VIEWING (Date of visit 20th June 2006 at 2.35 p.m.)

Regulatory Committee 21/06/2006

Report of the Executive Director

APPLICATION REF: WP/2006/0142/F

PROPOSAL: Convert 2 no. semi-detached houses into 4 no. flats (resubmission).

LOCATION: 5-7 Albert Road, Wellingborough.

APPLICANT: Plough Developments.

NOTE: This application was deferred at the meeting of the Regulatory Committee held on 26th April 2006 to enable a visit to be made by the Site Viewing Group.

In addition, concern was expressed regarding car parking, highway safety and the impact on the amenities of neighbouring residents. With regard to these concerns, there is not any more to be added to the points dealing with the issues as set out in the ‘Previous Officer’s Report’ (attached).

S S D 3 R 1 2 O 0 A D D AD D RO N

489600 O 489800 1 D © Crown Copyright. All rights reserved. WP/2006/0142/F ED 6 N D FI Borough Council Of Wellingborough: Licence No.100018694. Published 07/06/2006 R C y Bd 4 d 897 ar D W 268700 D 268700 2 B D D 82.9m D Rowan Gate D D Primary School D

83.2m B ( D GP

Delafield D D D D D Garage D ld D fie gh ry Hi se ur ol 82.0m LB N ho

686 D Sc 686 ( 5 @ 0 1 ( B

m Victoria

9 a

2 D

.0 4 1 y 6 Infants 8 d

M d b r 2 School a W d

n a 2 D E D

4 4 A L D B E R

4 2 R

b O

2 4

1 2 D A A 2 L D 1 E

2 X

a Scrap Yard 4 A

2 N 4

2 D D R A R 1

O 1 A 1 2 3

D 1 2 1 a D 1 5 D

D D

2 3 4

5 1

0 D 2 2 5 3

E 9

685 685

7 C V 4

2 F 3

3 1 1 1

4 3 9 1

5 C 1 V V W Scrap Yard A

1 V S

A 9 8 Y 4 E V M B

W VL

S 6 F 3 C

C 4 3 L 5 V 9 0 O 1

8 S V

E 4 1 2 1

Scrap Yard

8 0

6 o

0 5 5

2 8 7 8 5 1 5

8 4 8 7 A

a 6 2 m s

Y 3 2 a

r d 2

S 7

u 6

t 8 h 6 67

6 8 7 3 a

Rosemarie 6 9

6 9

a 1

7 ok 1 No

268400 Th 4 268400 8 8 5 489600 489800 8 897 7 13 8

S 3 7

ta 6 a n 7 l 8

e 9

y 6 Scale 1:1250 8 M 8 e 9 w 1 a 27 s 9 2 1 7a 8 3

2 9

( LB 8 5 O R I G I N A L R E P O R T

BOROUGH COUNCIL OF WELLINGBOROUGH AGENDA ITEM

Regulatory Committee 26/04/2006

Report of the Executive Director

APPLICATION REF: WP/2006/0142/F

PROPOSAL: Convert 2 no. semi-detached houses into 4 no. flats (resubmission).

LOCATION: 5-7 Albert Road, Wellingborough.

APPLICANT: Plough Developments.

PROPOSAL AND DESCRIPTION OF SITE: (As above). The proposal is a re-submission of an identical proposal that was made early last year (Planning Application reference number WP/2005/0148/F). The scheme is to convert a pair of older traditional style semi-detached properties into 4 individual flats (2 in each original dwelling unit, 1 to each floor). The application site property is located on the east side of Albert Road (which is a fairly narrow street dominated by parked cars along its length) in an area of mostly older housing within the area of the town beyond and to the north-east of the town centre core area. For the majority of its length, Albert Road comprises late Victorian bay fronted terraced houses, although at its northern end and in the vicinity of the application site, the properties are newer semi- detached types. Beyond the neighbouring pair of semi-detached dwellings to the north, on the corner with Finedon Road, there is a car sales and service garage business. Each flat is to comprise a reception room, bedroom, kitchen and bathroom. Access to each pair of flats on the first floor is via a central circulation area served from a conversion of the hall and landing of the original dwelling. Access to the ground floor flats is to be via alleyways (lit at night by lights with motion sensors) to the side of the original dwelling houses to serve a door to the kitchens at the rear. The existing gardens are to remain but there is no provision for on site car parking.

The applicant has written a covering letter providing information in support of the application. Reference is made to the present number of single person households and the shortfall of accommodation to meet the needs of such households. It is suggested that if numbers 5 & 7 Albert Road were refurbished and sold as semi-detached houses they could accommodate 2 working driving adults with children approaching driving age. The current proposal would result in a reduction of bedrooms (from 6 at present to 4). The likely occupants of the flats (first time/single occupancy buyers) may include people who cannot afford a car and given that the location is within walking distance of the town centre a car would not be an essential necessity in any event. It is suggested that whether the properties remain as 2 x 3 bedroom semi-detached dwellings or are converted to 4 x 1 bedroom flats the parking requirement is felt to be little different and in all probability there will be fewer vehicles needing to be able to park with the flat conversion option. 6

This application needs to be determined by the Regulatory Committee due to the number of objections that have been received.

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY: WP/2005/0148/F Convert 2 no. semi detached houses into 4 no. 1 bedroom flats (withdrawn).

NATIONAL AND LOCAL PLANNING POLICY: Borough of Wellingborough Local Plan Policies: G1, UH5 and H15. Northamptonshire County Structure Plan Policies: GS2 and GS3. PPS1. Planning Policy Guidance Note: 3

SUMMARY OF REPLIES TO CONSULTATIONS/REPRESENTATIONS RECEIVED: 1. County Highway Authority – the highway standards and planning conditions set out in the NCC document ‘Minor Planning Applications that have an effect on the highway’ be applies to this planning application.

2. Third Parties – a letter (plus petition containing 23 signatures) has been received from the occupiers of 6 Albert Road expressing concerns regarding lack of off road parking on a road already subject to congestion from parked cars. It is states that there will be an adverse effect upon the car valeting service operating from the adjacent property and to the garage at the Eastfield Park end of Albert Road. It is felt that those properties in the street that actually do have garages and driveways will have their driveways obstructed by the extra parking cars that will be a consequence of allowing the proposal. The objectors would welcome the proposal if there was adequate off road parking. Letters making similar points have been received from the occupiers of Nos. 2A and 4 Albert Road. making similar points and in addition suggesting that with more households being created the noise will be greater.

ASSESSMENT: The issues that need to be determined in the consideration of this application are as follows: (i) Suitability of the use in this location. (ii) Impact upon the amenities of neighbouring land users. (iii) Responding to the points made by the objectors

(i) Notwithstanding the fact that this is a proposal to change the use of existing vacant dwellings into two flats, the scheme is in accordance with adopted planning policy for this precise location and a suitable use to meet this specialist aspect of the housing needs of the Borough. Policy H15 permits the conversion of dwellings into flats provided that there is no adverse impact upon the amenities of the occupiers of neighbouring properties.

(ii) Given the nature of the surrounding area, it is not felt that the proposal will result in an overriding adverse impact upon the amenities of adjoining land users. The issue of lack of car parking directly associated with the proposed accommodation is though a material consideration. The latter though needs to be assessed in the light of the fact there is not any objection from the Highway Authority and the proposal is in line with Government advice that in order to meet small household needs, schemes of this kind should be encouraged regardless of lack of on site car parking. The view is taken that over time the lack of direct provision for car 7 parking in central areas (i.e. in terms of simple economics the ‘supply of parking spaces’), may be influential in reducing the demand for the same. Also there is no legal right to park on the highway and problems of existing car parking congestion can in theory always be solved by the imposition of a Traffic/Parking Order. Any increased impacts arising from the intensified residential use of these premises (by virtue of the proposed conversion into flats) are felt to be insufficient to warrant refusal of the application.

(iii) Nearly all the points arising in the objections raised by the residents have already been addressed in (ii) above. In respect of noise, Proposed Condition No. 2 responds to this point and any other problems arising over and above the control imposed as a result of the condition can be dealt with under Environmental Health legislation.

There are not any valid reasons or material planning considerations why planning permission should not be granted.

RECOMMENDATION: Approve with conditions,

1. The development shall be begun not later than the expiration of three years beginning with the date of this permission. 2. Prior to the commencement of development a scheme for sound insulation between the flats shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The agreed scheme shall be completed before the flats are occupied.

Reasons: 1. Required to be imposed pursuant to S51 of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004. 2. In the interests of residential amenity.

INFORMATIVE/S 1. Pursuant to Section 38 (6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004, the proposed development complies with regional strategy and the applicable development plan policies and there are no other material considerations that would constitute sustainable grounds for refusal. These include specifically the following policies: GS2 and GS3 of the Northamptonshire County Structure Plan and G1, H12 and H15 of the Borough of Wellingborough Local Plan. 2. The applicant is advised that this decision relates to the following drawing numbers received on the date shown: Drawing Number: Date Received: SK-198-001/002 17/03/2006

BOROUGH COUNCIL OF WELLINGBOROUGH AGENDA ITEM

SITE VIEWING (Date of visit 20th June 2006 at 4.10 p.m.)

Regulatory Committee 21/06/2006

Report of the Executive Director

APPLICATION REF: WP/2006/0153/O

PROPOSAL: Erection of single dwelling.

LOCATION: Land at 152 London Road, Wollaston, Wellingborough.

APPLICANT: Mr Rodney Hall.

NOTE: This application was deferred at Regulatory Committee on 24th May 2006 to enable the Site Viewing Group to visit the site.

8 2

4 55

0 5

1 l 2 l 6 p

906 o a

W B

0 7 Cromwell 7 262600 7 262600

House

4 7 74.7m

h t 1 a 2

0 1

P 1 B

a 2

6 3 k 4 n

Pearson Ba

8 1 2

Mews 4

8 7

2 9

6 9 2

Nag's Head

4 Inn 0 1 1 0 0 625 1 625 E OV GR 2

0 HE 8 T 8 1 4

1 1

0 2

5 5 1

1 3 El Sub Sta 1 B 73.5m

158 160

5 2

624 1 624

Surgery

6 1 6 167

) O

m R u ( 19

N 177 h 15 t a O 1

P 6 D

6 N 7

L 1

Police House H

1 A 8

0 Z

1 E

D 0 E

8 1 N C 4 1 15 L 7 1 O

68.3m 3 262300 B S 262300 H

E T 1

490500 490700 1

8 906 2 1

1 1 9

Scale 1:1250 3 5

1 9 O R I G I N A L R E P O R T

BOROUGH COUNCIL OF WELLINGBOROUGH AGENDA ITEM

Regulatory Committee 24/05/2006

Report of the Executive Director

APPLICATION REF: WP/2006/0153/O

PROPOSAL: Erection of single dwelling.

LOCATION: Land at 152 London Road, Wollaston, Wellingborough.

APPLICANT: Mr Rodney Hall.

PROPOSAL AND DESCRIPTION OF SITE: The application site is currently garden land within the residential curtilage of no. 152 London Road, Wollaston. The site is located to the front of the existing bungalow. The site is within the village policy line for Wollaston, which is designated a Limited Development Village by the Borough of Wellingborough Local Plan. No. 150, a two storey dwelling, is located to the north west of the site. Both no. 150 and no. 152 benefit from the same access point off London Road. A Scheduled Ancient Monument is located to the south of the site. There are a number of trees on site which will be affected by the development.

This application seeks outline planning permission for a single dwelling on the site detailed above. All details are to be left for reserved matters applications.

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY: Planning History for no. 152 London Road, Wollaston.

WR/61/160 Bungalow and garage – approved with conditions. WR/67/91 Sun lounge/conservatory – approved.

NATIONAL AND LOCAL PLANNING POLICY: G1, G4, H2 and H12 of the Borough of Wellingborough Local Plan.

SUMMARY OF REPLIES TO CONSULTATIONS/REPRESENTATIONS RECEIVED: 1. Wollaston Parish Council – objection is raised on the grounds of overdevelopment, and exit onto London Road not practical.

2. Highways Authority – no objection is raised but the following recommendations are made:

• The vehicular crossing must be constructed in accordance with the specification of Northamptonshire County Council.

• To prevent loose material being carried onto the public highway at least the first 5m of the driveway must be hard-paved. 10

• Pedestrian to vehicle visibility of 2m x 2m above a height of 0.6m must be provided and maintained on both sides of the point of access.

3. Natural and Built Environment, Northamptonshire County Council – verbal comments received and written comments submitted:-

“I've received and had a chance to review the information contained in the archaeological desk-based assessment produced for the applicants by CgMs Consulting and submitted in support of the current outline application. I had been approached by the applicant's agents (SSR) in December 2005 and had advised that a desk-based assessment should be prepared as an initial step in addressing the archaeological implications of development at this site and that this information would be needed to support any future planning application. The CgMs report summarises adequately the known archaeology of the site and surrounding area and the site's potential for additional, as-yet undiscovered, remains, and I am happy that no additional information needs to be sought at this stage.

The proposed development site lies in an area of considerable potential archaeological significance, on a street frontage within the historic settlement core of Wollaston, immediately adjacent to one of the village's two historic manorial centres. The archaeological remains of the adjacent manor complex are considered to be of national importance and are designated as a Scheduled Ancient Monument.

I feel there are two archaeological issues that will need to be considered regarding development at this site: The direct physical impact of the proposed development on surviving archaeological remains within the site itself, and the indirect impact of the scheme on the setting of archaeological monuments and remains in adjacent areas.

In relation to the direct impact of new development, the accumulation of topsoil noted in the desk-based assessment (para 4.1.2) provides some reassurance that any important remains may be present at some depth below the modern ground surface, sealed beneath (archaeologically unimportant) modern overburden. Thus it may be possible for the impact of new development groundworks to be restricted to the modern made ground, limiting damage to underlying archaeological remains.

I would however suggest that a condition is attached to any outline consent granted, requiring the developer to undertake archaeological trial fieldwork in advance of final design (i.e. before submitting Reserved Matters applications) to confirm the depth of modern overburden and the presence/absence of significant archaeological remains. Detailed design proposals submitted as Reserved Matters should be required to take into account the results of the trial works and the desirability of preserving important remains in situ, with archaeological investigation and recording being possibly seen as an acceptable alternative if preservation in situ was not possible and the importance of the identified archaeological remains did not demand their physical preservation.

In relation to the 'setting issue' the report summarises the current setting and context of the Scheduled site. I would suggest that it should be possible to provide a development which does not have a major additional negative impact 11 on the setting of the archaeological monument to the south, if the design of any new dwelling is carefully planned. The current outline application presents only a notional, feasibility scheme, design.”

4. English Heritage – the application should be determined in accordance with national and local policy guidance, and on the basis of your specialist conservation advice.

5. Conservation officer – no comment.

6. Landscape Officer – the following comments have been made:

“In terms of visual amenity this site does not contribute much to the street scene as it is. There is little vegetation to relieve the expanse of garden boundary wall. The laburnum tree adjacent to the existing entrance is shown to be retained. It does have amenity value.

The two trees in the far corner which are shown to be removed are a crab apple and an ash. The ash tree is certainly visually prominent, all the more because of its isolation. There is a crack in the retaining wall adjacent to it. This tree has been subjected to extensive and for some part inexpert tree surgery. As a consequence the canopy is high with co-dominant leaders providing high wind resistance. It would be regrettable if it was lost to the development, even though it has faults.

The site is very limited in size, and it would be difficult to retain the two trees if it was decided that they could be retained even though they would completely shade the very small rear garden area.”

7. Central Networks – no objections.

8. Third Parties – two letters of objection have been received from the occupiers of neighbouring properties. The objections and comments are summarised below:

• Insufficient space for the development.

• The proposed sub-division is a sub-division of an already sub-divided plot, with the land being by far the larger part of the small front and side garden of the existing bungalow. The land could continue to be used as private amenity space.

• Unlikely that first time buyers would be able to afford the property and with a 1.5 storey building enjoying limited privacy it is unlikely to appeal to an elderly buyer.

• The vehicular access is extremely dangerous. Another access point would make leaving and joining London Road more difficult, visibility splays required would take up most of the site and the proposed access is close to a danger point where the road narrows significantly.

• The proposed dwelling does not reflect the existing pattern of development where properties are set well back from the road, and will not therefore enhance the appearance of the streetscene. The application is not in keeping with surrounding properties. 12

• The plans show dormer and velux windows to the London Road elevation of the property – surely the potential owners would prefer to look over fields to the rear.

• Regarding archaeological matters, a field investigation should take pace to determine the extent of remains.

• Anything other than a single storey dwelling would be too imposing and inappropriate bearing in mind that the scale of development must be taken into account in the assessing the visual impact of the proposal in relation to the Scheduled Ancient Monument.

ASSESSMENT: Principle of the Development This application is to establish to principle of residential on the site. The site, which is within the Wollaston village policy line, is currently garden land to the front of an existing bungalow located along London Road. Policy G4 of the local plan designates Wollaston as a Limited Development Village. In such locations residential development will be permitted providing that there is no adverse impact on the size, form, character and setting of the village and its environs.

Although this application is for outline permission only, an indicative drawing has been submitted to illustrate how a new dwelling could be accommodated on the site. It is considered that a dwelling could not be sited an adequate distance away from the existing property at no. 152 without having a detrimental impact on the amenities currently enjoyed by the existing occupiers. Supplementary Planning Guidance (SPG) VIII: Building Better Places advises that there should be a minimum of 12 metres between rear facing windows in a property and the ones in a flank wall of another. This is not only to ensure there is no loss of privacy but also to ensure that that there is no adverse impact in terms of loss of light on either the existing or new dwelling. It is considered that the provision of an adequate amount of amenity space to the new dwelling will be unachievable and that the development would also leave the existing dwelling at no. 152 with an inadequate level of private amenity space. No. 152 currently has an existing conservatory to the rear which further limits the amount of amenity space to the rear. The front garden area therefore constitutes a large part of the curtilage around this existing dwelling. Although a dwelling could be sited on the land it is considered that any development is likely to give rise to inadequate levels of private amenity afforded to the new and existing properties. Overall the proposal is considered to be overdevelopment of the site and therefore would have an adverse impact on the character of the area.

Trees on Site There are a number of trees on site which would be affected by the development. These trees are considered to constitute a constraint to development. The landscape officer has commented on the application. It is stated that it would be regrettable if trees were to be removed and although it would be preferable to retain the trees where possible it is considered that the imposition of a Tree Preservation Order would not be justified in this case.

Archaeology and Scheduled Ancient Monument Regarding archaeological remains and the Scheduled Ancient Monument, adjacent to the site, a number of verbal comments have been put forward by the Built Environment team at the Northamptonshire County Council. The archaeological desk based 13 assessment submitted with the application highlights that there are important archaeological remains within the locality. The effect of the development on the setting of the Scheduled Ancient Monument, including the visual impact, also needs to be considered. Taking into account the existing dwelling at no. 152 and development to the south of the site it is considered that a dwelling could be designed in such a way as to not have an impact on the setting of the Scheduled Monument for example a single storey or 1.5 storey dwelling if appropriately designed. If permission were to be granted for the development conditions would need to be attached to ensure that a programme of site investigation is carried out prior to any reserved matters applications being submitted and that archaeological remains are recorded or preserved.

Summary On balance it is considered that the proposed development represents overdevelopment of a plot which currently constitutes a large part of the residential curtilage of no. 152. It is considered that an adequate level of private amenity, including amenity space, to the existing and new dwellings will not be achievable in this case. The overdevelopment would have an adverse impact on the character of the locality and each dwelling would have an adverse effect on the other’s amenities.

RECOMMENDATION: Refuse.

1. The proposed development is considered to be overdevelopment of the application site as both the existing dwelling at no.152 and the new dwelling would not benefit from adequate levels of private amenity. This overdevelopment would have an adverse impact on the character of the locality and each dwelling would have an adverse effect on the other's amenities. The proposal is therefore considered to be contrary to Policy G1 (1), H2 (2), H12 (1) and H12 (4) of the Borough of Wellingborough Local Plan.

POLICY G1

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

1. IS OF A HIGH STANDARD OF DESIGN WHICH RESPECTS AND ENHANCES THE CHARACTER OF ITS SURROUNDINGS.

POLICY H12

PLANNING PERMISSION WILL BE GRANTED FOR RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT PROVIDED THAT:

1. THE PROPOSED DENSITY IS COMPATIBLE WITH THE CHARACTERISTICS OF THE SITE AND ITS SURROUNDINGS; AND

4. REASONABLE STANDARDS OF PRIVATE AMENITY ARE AFFORDED TO ALL DWELLINGS.

14 POLICY H2

TO ENSURE A LEVEL OF PROVISION COMMENSURATE WITH THEIR STATUS AS THE PRIMARY LOCATIONS FOR RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT IN THE RURAL AREA, PLANNING PERMISSION WILL BE GRANTED FOR RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT WITHIN THE VILLAGE POLICY LINES OF THE LIMITED DEVELOPMENT VILLAGES OF EARLS BARTON, FINEDON AND WOLLASTON PROVIDED THAT THE PROPOSAL:

2. WILL HAVE NO ADVERSE IMPACT UPON THE SIZE, FORM, CHARACTER AND SETTING OF THE VILLAGE AND ITS ENVIRONS.

BOROUGH COUNCIL OF WELLINGBOROUGH AGENDA ITEM

SITE VIEWING (Date of visit 20th June 2006 at 2.15 p.m.)

Regulatory Committee 21/06/2006

Report of the Executive Director

APPLICATION REF: WP/2006/0189/F

PROPOSAL: Construction of single dwelling - amended and additional plans.

LOCATION: Land adjacent Lymehurst, The Avenue, Wellingborough.

APPLICANT: Mr Andrew Howard, Bassetform Limited.

This application is referred to the Regulatory Committee for determination because more than two letters of objection have been received from nearby residents.

PROPOSAL AND DESCRIPTION OF SITE: Construction of 2½ storey dwellinghouse with 3 no. dormer windows in the roof plane that fronts onto The Avenue.

The site is currently the large side garden area of Lymehurst which is a commodious detached dwellinghouse. The site slopes gently down from the northwest to the southeast and beyond the rear boundary of the site are outbuildings at a noticeably lower level that belong to the terrace of dwellings that front onto Alexandra Road. Adjoining the south-eastern flank boundary is Rockdene that is another large detached dwellinghouse which is built upto the boundary and has a blank flank wall facing the proposed development. The development nearby is housing that is varied in its age, design, exterior facing materials and configuration. The Avenue is unusual inasmuch it does not have footpaths adjoining the carriageway but it does have the benefit of many mature trees and shrubs that are located in the grass verges between the metalled part of the highway and the front boundaries of the dwellings that front onto the road. Situated at the entrance to The Avenue is an Infants School that, in common with most educational establishments, generates vehicular traffic for relatively short periods of time during the morning and again in the middle of the afternoon when parents drop off and pick up their children.

Amended plans have been received on 27th April and that shows the proposed building on its plot lining up with the fronts of the two adjacent dwellings. An additional street scene drawing was received on 5th May 2006 that illustrates the proposed dwellinghouse in relation to the designs and heights of the neighbouring dwellings.

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY: WP/2001/0609/O Proposed building plot – conditionally approved.

T D EE D TR

Gas Govn S 9 5

11 LD 5

O 1 2 G 2

1 Borough Council Of Wellingborough: Licence No.100018694. Published 07/06/2006 1

83.5m 4

892 5

4 B @ 7 10 (

268600 B 268600

M 3

5 1

1 2 8 4

0 5

6 7 0 8 m

5 2 95 83.5m

Warehouse

B 3 6

1 0 6

Orchard M 4 House e B 0 d E i c D a White Lodge l A

C 1 L

e 5 E n t r R e O A Beechwood D LB T (

0 3 0 E 2 8

1 V 4

E @ N 7m .3 U ( 82 M E B Burford House The Coach Rose Lawn House

The Poplars

1 3

1 6

685 685

4 1

9 2

7 2 7 1 8 0

8 a

5 3 6 0 B 8 E D A Charnwood L 1 E

t o R

4 O

A 3

1 D

9 2 Ivy Crest 7 0 A V E N U E

1 R O A D

Lymehurst 1 0

5 1 B

77.5m 2

5 Rockdene 2 1

684 El Sub Sta T 684 H E 6a A

S 1 7 V to 10 5 6 W 1 E Willdana t E o N 6 4 M 5 U d K 17 e R E n s A 76 20 P .2 1 BAK B

4 ER STR 4 E

1 2

2 1

1 1

1 6

F a c

o 3 r 0 5 y 4 c

7 1

s 3 ork

Warehouse W 2

a 8

73.0m 4 a

1 5 6 s ork

1 W 2 0 8 B m 4b Epworth 13 5 3. T 7 E M B E R T S

8 5

a ( @ R A L P

8 5 rt 5 u Co The Avenue P th BM or Infant School ew

72.00m ng 1 4 @ e B 6 5 7 268300 ( 268300 13

73a 489100 489300 3

5 892 T 3 E 3

RE 1 5 T 0 2 S 1 W Scale 1:1250

NE Park House

0 Nursing Home

6 5

a 0 6 LIT

TLE 2 9 2 3 6 16 NATIONAL AND LOCAL PLANNING POLICY: Regional Spatial Strategy 8 Northamptonshire County Structure Plan - GS5 and H6 Borough of Wellingborough Local Plan – G1, H1, UH1, UH5 and T9 Supplementary Planning Guidance – Parking, Trees on Development Sites, Building Better Places and Planning Out Crime Planning Policy Statement 1; Delivering Sustainable Development Planning Policy Guidance 3; Housing Planning Policy Guidance 13; Transport

SUMMARY OF REPLIES TO CONSULTATIONS/REPRESENTATIONS RECEIVED: 1. NCC Highways –

“The representations made by neighbouring occupiers are noted but there is little about the application that might cause me concern. The Avenue is a street of special, arcadian character deriving from a formal drive to one of the more important residences of the town. Although it has built up gradually over the last century it still exhibits a low density of development and retains its trees and shrub lined verges. Being gated at the north end, through traffic is prevented and pedestrians pass along the carriageway in relative safety. It is considered that the present nature of the planting encourages caution by drivers resulting in a form of natural traffic calming. It is unfortunate, but symptomatic of the demands for parking accommodation, that The Avenue is daily occupied by parked vehicles. This gives some concern, both in terms of traffic safety and appearance, but it is not considered appropriate for controls to be established to prevent, what is largely, a transitory activity. The property is to take access by way of an existing vehicular crossing and, whilst visibility for and of emerging traffic may be limited, wholesale clearance of adjoining planting is not considered to be warranted. It is suggested that the applicant be urged to take a responsible attitude to the need to retain adequate visibility on each side of the point of access and to achieve an effective maintenance regime by timely communication with the local authority. It is considered that the safety of other road users would be enhanced by ensuring that vehicles enter and leave the site in a forward direction and a suitable turning facility must be provided within the curtilage of the property.”

2. Environmental Protection Service – considers that the submitted Environmental Risk Assessment was inadequate and suggests that another should be submitted as part of this application or be conditioned for submission after approval but before development commences.

3. Neighbours – letters of objection has been received from the occupiers of Roselawn, Rockdene, 13, 17, and 23 The Avenue who cite the following reasons for opposing the proposal:

• Three storey dwelling will be out of character with the surrounding buildings and the area in general. • Loss of privacy. • Loss of light. • Reference to the loss of two lime trees in The Avenue that have not been replaced and increased risk to the vitality of the remaining trees as a result of the development. Also reference to British Standard BS5837 (Trees in Relation to Construction). 17 • Increase in noise and light pollution and headlights from vehicles that would belong to the new occupiers will shine into front windows. • Query regarding covenants and the adoption of The Avenue relating to the lime trees. • The dormer windows if approved will set a precedent as there are no other similar windows in The Avenue. • Lack of amenity space for the potential occupiers of the proposed dwellinghouse. • The site contributes to the green openness that gives The Avenue its character. • Danger to pedestrians from cars and from cyclists because The Avenue is part of the town’s designated cycle network. • Reference to existing parking and access problems locally that will be exacerbated by the proposal. • Building materials left in The Avenue. • Reference to Government advice that seeks to achieve the majority of new housing development on brownfield sites and belief that garden land should not have been included within this definition of brownfield land. • Opinion that developers are “cocksure” in this era.

ASSESSMENT: The material planning considerations are: • Compliance with policy • Effect on neighbours amenities • Amenity space • Effect on visual amenity • Parking • Crime and disorder

Compliance with policy The proposal site is situated on a brownfield site within the built up area of a town and the scheme is therefore considered to be in accord with elements of Government guidance and other development plan policies with regards directing new housing development to brownfield sites within urban areas.

Effect on neighbours’ amenities It is expected that the scheme will affect the standard of amenities that are currently enjoyed by the occupiers of the neighbouring dwellings but it is considered that the effects will not be sufficiently detrimental to warrant refusing the application for the following reasons:

• Adequate spacing around the proposed dwelling in relation to the surrounding buildings that mitigates against any untoward loss of privacy despite the differing ground level in relation to the dwellings at the rear. • Position on the plot which also reduces the effects on the next door neighbours’ privacy. • The outbuildings in the rear gardens of the Alexandra Road dwellings will protect these occupiers from any undue loss of amenity that could result from the proposed dwellinghouse and the mass of the intended garage. • Dwellinghouse immediately to the southeast has a blank wall facing the development. • The residual amount of light that will be available as a result of the development to the adjoining residential occupiers will be commensurate with an urban area. 18

Amenity space One of the reasons identified by a neighbour for objecting to the proposal is the length of the rear amenity space. The plans illustrate a rear garden length of approximately 9.5m which is deficient by 1m in retrospect to the 10.5m suggested in the Supplementary Planning Guidance – Building Better Places. It is acknowledged that there a slight shortfall in the amenity space that is to be provided but the Government’s advice is that local planning authorities should be flexible in their application of amenity standards in urban areas. Also, it would be unreasonable to adhere strictly to the guidance when there is no demonstrable harm to the amenities of occupiers of neighbouring dwellings that would flow from a slightly below standard rear garden amenity area.

Effect on visual amenity The street scene has been described above and the comments of the residents in the locality are noted, but it is clear that there is no clear architectural style evident in The Avenue. It is accepted that the design of the proposed dwellinghouse includes dormer windows, but the fact that there are no others in the street which has a medley of historical styles is not an overriding reason to refuse the application. Overall, the design of the proposed is uncontentious and the applicant has supplied a plan which adequately shows that the proposed building will not be a visually discordant feature in the street scene. It is further considered that the mass of the proposed dwellinghouse will complement the size and scale of the other dwellings nearby and it will not have any detrimental effect on the visual amenity of the area. With reference to the highway trees it is considered that they can be adequately protected during construction by an appropriately worded condition and any new access to the existing dwellinghouse can also be controlled in the same way to minimize the effects on the trees.

Parking The comments of the Highway Authority are clear and comprehensive and it is considered that to refuse the application on the grounds of danger to highway safety would be unsustainable. It is recommended however that suitable access conditions relating to the proposed and existing dwellings be imposed for the reasons of ensuring highway safety.

Crime and disorder It is considered that there are no pertinent crime and disorder issues that need to be taken into consideration in the determination of this application.

None material planning considerations • Covenants and the historic adoption of the highway by the local authority. • Storage of building materials in the highway.

RECOMMENDATION: Approve subject to conditions.

1. The development shall be begun not later than the expiration of three years beginning with the date of this permission. 2. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the amended plan(s) deposited with the local planning authority on 27th April 2006 . 3. Representative samples of all external facing and roofing materials shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority before the development is commenced and the development shall be carried out using the 19 approved materials. 4. Before development commences a plan shall be submitted to the local planning authority and agreed in writing that identifies two off road car parking spaces to be available for the occupiers of Lymehurst. The approved scheme shall be completed to the satisfaction of the local planning authority before the hereby approved dwellinghouse is first occupied. 5. Before development commences a plan shall be submitted to the local planning authority that illustrates a turning head within the curtilage of the hereby approved dwellinghouse to enable cars to enter and exit the site in a forward gear. The approved turning head and first 5m. of access road in the rear of the public highway shall be hard surfaced to the satisfaction of the local planning authority and shall be completed before the dwellinghouse is first occupied. 6. Before development commences a tree protection scheme that guards the nearby highway trees shall be submitted to the local planning authority and approved in writing. The approved scheme shall be implemented before development commences and shall be maintained to the satisfaction of the local planning authority until construction work on the hereby approved development site has ceased. 7. Notwithstanding the provisions of The Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995, or any Order revoking or re-enacting that Order, the rear elevation of the roof shall not be altered or extended without the consent in writing of the local planning authority.

Reasons: 1. Required to be imposed pursuant to S51 of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004. 2. To ensure that the development is carried out in accordance with the agreed amendments. 3. In the interests of visual amenity. 4. In the interests of highway safety. 5. In the interests of highway safety. 6. In order to protect the vitality of the nearby highway trees. 7. In order to protect the amenity of nearby residential occupiers.

INFORMATIVE/S 1. Pursuant to Section 38 (6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004, the proposed development complies with the applicable development plan policies and there are no other material considerations that would constitute sustainable grounds for refusal. These include specifically the following policies: Regional Spatial Strategy 8 Northamptonshire County Structure Plan - GS5 and H6 Borough of Wellingborough Local Plan - G1, H1, UH1, UH5 and T9 Supplementary Planning Guidance - Parking, Building Better Places and Planning Out Crime Planning Policy Statement 1; Delivering Sustainable Development Planning Policy Guidance 3; Housing Planning Policy Guidance 13; Transport. 2. The applicant is advised that this decision relates to the following drawing numbers received on the dates shown: Drawing Number: Date Received: 121-P01 (P3) 27th April 2006 121-P-02 (P1) 5th May 2006 20 3. The applicant is advised that planning permission does not automatically allow the construction of the vehicle crossing, details of which require the approval of the Highway Authority. In this regard you should contact the Team Leader Regulations, Sustainable Transport, Riverside House, Riverside Way, Northampton NN1 5NX prior to any construction/excavation works within the public highway. 21

BOROUGH COUNCIL OF WELLINGBOROUGH AGENDA ITEM

SITE VIEWING (Date of visit 20th June 2006 at 4.40 p.m.)

Regulatory Committee 21/06/2006

Report of the Executive Director

APPLICATION REF: WP/2006/0253/F

PROPOSAL: Construction of two new dwellings.

LOCATION: Land off Church Way, Grendon, Wellingborough.

APPLICANT: Mr R Merrington.

This application is brought before the Committee because it is subject to a number of objections including one from the Grendon Parish Council.

PROPOSAL AND DESCRIPTION OF SITE: Application for two dwellings on land in the Conservation Area, in front of a Listed Building and opposite the church in Grendon.

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY: Most recent are: WP/2005/0615/LB and WP/2005/0616/F – applications for Listed Building Consent and Planning Permission for the erection of three dwellings – both withdrawn.

NATIONAL AND LOCAL PLANNING POLICY: Borough of Wellingborough Local Plan Policies H3, H12, G1, G4, G9 and G12. Supplementary Planning Guidance VIII, Building Better Places and the Countywide item of Supplementary Planning Guidance on Parking.

SUMMARY OF REPLIES TO CONSULTATIONS/REPRESENTATIONS RECEIVED: 1. County Highway Authority - the shared private drive serving the existing and proposed development is to be no less than 4.5m wide over the first 10m and, to prevent loose material being carried out onto the public highway, must be hard- paved over the first 5m. I have expressed some concern with regard to the lack of visibility between the access to the site and Church Way but acknowledge the importance of the buildings and structures on this site to the quality of the conservation area. As a minimum requirement it is required that pedestrian to vehicle visibility over a height of 0.6m be provided within splays of 2m x 2m on each side of the point of access. Although it is noted that the proposed external wall of Unit 1 corresponds with the external boundary wall of the site it must be ensured that no part of the proposal extends over or into the public highway. Any windows proposed on the highway frontage of the building must be of a type that opens inward only. The innovative feature, comprising a strip of granite setts over the frontage of the site, is noted. Whilst its use to enhance available visibility may be of value it must be emphasised that it should not be regarded as a form of defence between the building and passing traffic. Church Way is 487700 © Crown Copyright. All rights reserved. WP/2006/0253/F 487900 Borough Council Of Wellingborough: Licence No.100018694. Published 07/06/2006 878 260600 260600

7 3

Grave Yard

Church Farm

Church 4 Cottage 605 D 605

a Pond 4 TCB

St Mary's Church (

6 3

3 .

7 k D ( M @ 8 A B B 73.4m O R Hom 10 71.6m B N I

7 M 5 1

2 1

1 6

1 a 1 4

604 1 604

1 5

4 1 B

1 Chapel

70.1m 1

1 Y a a

8 A

1 1 b

1 2

W 1

1 9

5 RC Church 1

HU 6 Room C

2 2 3 B 72.2m El

GP B B G 68.9m Grendon ( 70.7m C E Primary

School 3 5 260300 260300 1 E 3 B 487700 487900

M 878 S Villa Farm

7 O 3 Scale 1:1250 L . 9 C 9 or 4 @ 2 '

m ( S m N 73.8m O 30 S B R 22 already of inadequate width and, if provided, the feature must be laid flush with the existing surface of the carriageway so that the available carriageway width is not further reduced. This feature must be constructed in accordance with the specification of Northamptonshire County Council and subject to a suitable agreement. You should satisfy yourself as to the adequacy of parking accommodation provided to serve both the existing and proposed development affected by this application. The applicant is advised to discuss refuse collection aspects of the proposal with the appropriate officer of the Borough Council of Wellingborough. The Application Site is affected by a Public Right of Way. Public Footpath TF16 passes through the site of the proposal and the application must also be referred to the County Rights of Way Officer.

2. County Council, Public Rights of Way Officer - we have no objections to the application but I would make the following comments in respect of public rights of way. I would draw your attention to the existence of a public right of way, footpath TF16 through the proposed development. The following points should be taken in to account: The routes must be kept clear, unobstructed and safe for users at all times. No structures or materials may be placed on the right of way. Any damage to the surface of the path must be made good by the applicant, specifications for any repair or surfacing work must be approved by this office. If as a result of the development the right of way needs to be closed a Traffic Regulation Order will be required. An application form for such an order is available from Northamptonshire County Council, a fee is payable for this service and a period of six weeks notice is required.

3. Grendon Parish Council – strongly objects to the application. The reasons for this are as follows: a. There is an unresolved dispute about the applicant’s rights of access to the site and whether the occupiers of the new dwellings will be able to use it. b. The proposal will add to parking problems in the area (especially if the access issue cannot be resolved) and cause highway safety issues including poor visibility from the access. There are also issues related to people using the public right of way through the site being in conflict with those using the proposed parking area. There no need for the dwellings as the County Structure Plan target for new housing in rural area has been exceeded, and d. The windows at the rear of the dwellings will overlook and cause a loss of privacy to nearby properties.

4. Third Parties – a number of objections received on the following grounds:

a. Grendon is a conservation village and placing 2 cramped modern dwellings into a small space in the historical heart of the village would be very damaging to the village landscape and would not add appropriately to it. b. The applicant does not own the access road required to give access to the proposed houses or the car parking spaces. c. The development will add to parking problems in this part of the village including a loss of on street parking provision. d. This site, on a corner, will become dangerous for traffic on what is quite a blind bend at one of the busiest roads in the village – especially with another lot of traffic leaving the proposed car park not to mention their visitors. e. Quite considerable traffic and other disruption would ensue for the village over an extended construction period - which could easily block the road in this part of the village which would cause havoc. 23 f. The Old Forge is a listed and protected building - it would be seriously compromised by this development and would almost completely block three windows of that property. g. The building as proposed is too close to the Old Forge and it is in breach of the planning requirements that new builds are a certain specified distance from a neighbour's windows and walls. h. The construction of this development is likely to damage what foundations there may be at the Old Forge and this must risk damaging this old building. i. The Old Forge it does have an elderly and protected tenant. This scheme requires the use of her vegetable garden for the proposed car parking and her front garden for the houses. This is an unacceptable loss of amenity space for the Forge j. The proposed building plot is quite small and this development is an over use of this small plot. This will have an adverse effect on the character of this part of the village. k. The development will block existing views in the locality including ones of the Church. l. There is concern that if any windows open outwards in the new development this will extend into the highway. m. The proposed development will result in a reduction in the width of Church Way because of some granite setts proposed in front of the building. This will increase problems caused by traffic at this location. n. The new development will make access for emergency vehicles difficult. o. There is a Right of Way running through the site and users of this will face safety problems as a result of cars exiting the proposed parking spaces. p. The development will result in the loss of an important wall and trees and have an adverse effect on the Conservation Area. q. The development will result in extra noise and disturbance for the surroundings. r. The new houses will have inadequate amenity space.

One third party supports the proposal and points out recent cases where applications have been refused in Grendon and the applicants have won on appeal.

ASSESSMENT: Grendon is regarded as a ‘restricted infill’ village in the adopted Borough of Wellingborough Local Plan.

The proposal is located within the Village Policy Line for Grendon as defined in the adopted Borough of Wellingborough Local Plan. It is also within the Conservation Area for the village and in close proximity to the church and a number of other Listed Buildings. The site also has a number of trees within it and close to its boundary.

Policies G1, G4, G9, G12, H3 and H12 of the adopted Borough of Wellingborough Local Plan accept development of the type proposed at this location providing that it is an acceptable design and does not have an adverse effect on its surroundings.

Impact on Conservation Area and Listed Buildings

This is clearly a sensitive location and the proposal has been subject to extensive pre- application discussions with the Council’s Conservation Officer. As a result, the scheme has been reduced from three in a previous application to two. The Conservation Officer considers these are of an acceptable design in keeping with their 24 surroundings including the nearby church. The materials that are to be used in their construction have not been agreed at this stage but this aspect can be controlled by condition to ensure they are in keeping with the Conservation Area. The use of a local stone has been suggested by the applicants and is supported. This can be confirmed by the addition of wording in the conditions attached to any planning permission.

Proximity to other properties

In terms of effects on the amenities of adjacent properties, the Council’s adopted item of Supplementary Planning Guidance entitled ‘Building Better Places’ contains a number of standards including one which suggests that the rear facing windows of properties should be at least 12 metres from ones in the flank walls of others. Due to the orientation of the properties in this scheme and their relationship with others nearby, this is considered to be the best standard to apply in relation to proposed unit 2 and number 7 Church Way to the East. The scheme complies with this standard and therefore any effects on number 7 are considered insufficient to justify refusing the application. Unit 1 in the development will be alongside number 7 but with a gap of over 6 metres between the two dwellings. There will only be a small attic window in the roof of this unit which faces number 7. Any implications of overlooking from this are not sufficient to justify refusing this application.

A Listed property known as the Old Forge is located within the application site adjacent to the proposed dwellings. Unit 2 in the new development will be built alongside the Old Forge with a gap of about 2 metres between the two buildings. There will be no windows in the side elevation of Unit 2 facing the Old Forge. The rear elevation of unit 1 will also face the side of the Old Forge. There has been concern about the impact of the new development on the amount of light that the Old Forge receives. The main window to a habitable room which will be affected in this way is a 1st Floor window in the side elevation of the Old Forge which faces the side of unit 2 and the rear of unit 1 in the new development. This is thought to serve a bedroom. Unit 2 in the new development has been designed so as not to totally obscure this window. In addition, even though it is less than the usual 12 metres from the rear of unit 1 in the new development, the proposal has been designed on an angle so that no windows in the new dwellings will directly look towards this window. Similarly, this window will not look directly into windows in the new development. Any effects of the development on the amenities of the Old Forge are therefore not considered sufficient to justify refusing the application.

Finally, on this subject, with the previous scheme, there were concerns that the Old Forge would have an adverse impact on the amount of light received at the rear of the new dwelling proposed for unit 2. However, in the latest proposal, a pair of patio doors has been moved slightly further away from the Old Forge to allow more light in and address this concern.

Private amenity space

There have been concerns that this development will leave the Old Forge with an inadequate amount of amenity space. However, even with the dwellings on site, the Old Forge will still be left with a garden that is 12 metres wide by 13 metres long. This exceeds the 10.5 metres specified in the Council’s adopted item of Supplementary Planning Guidance entitled ‘Building Better Places’ as a suitable garden length. The development is therefore acceptable in terms of the amount of amenity space that the Old Forge is left with.

25 Neither of the new properties will achieve this distance. However, it is common in the centre of villages for properties only to have small gardens. This is therefore not a reason to refuse planning permission. Furthermore, any permission can contain conditions removing ‘permitted development’ rights to add to the properties or construct buildings in the gardens to help prevent this space becoming smaller.

Impact on the Setting of the Old Forge and the Conservation Area (including views to the Church)

The area between the Old Forge and Church Way is free at the moment and it is accepted that this sense of openness will be lost if the scheme proceeds. This will alter the character of the Conservation Area, setting of the Old Forge and also impact on the view of the Church which some people experience at present. However, the Council’s Conservation Officer is happy with the design of the scheme and feels that, once developed, the Conservation Area will be enhanced by this scheme. These concerns are therefore not considered sufficient to justify refusal of the application.

Highways, parking and public footpath

The objections about the footpath which runs through the site are accepted. However, this is proposed to be unrestricted by the development and the County Council’s Rights of Way Officer does not object to the proposal. An informative can be imposed on any permission asking for it not to be obstructed by building materials etc. Any conflict between users of the path and the parking spaces is not considered to be significant as the parking spaces will have adequate visibility for car users leaving them.

In terms of parking, two spaces are allowed within the development for each of the new dwellings plus two for the existing cottage on site (the forge). This exceeds the Countywide parking standard. However, due to the narrowness of nearby roads, this is considered justified.

On the subject of parking it should also be noted that part of the site is currently used for informal parking for tenants of an adjacent property. Alternate arrangements have been made for this nearby.

In response to the highway concerns that have been raised, the Highway Authority does not object to the proposal and suggests a number of conditions to be imposed on any condition to protect the interests of the users of the highway. There are therefore considered to be no highway grounds to justify refusal and include clauses preventing windows opening onto the highway, ensuring the carriageway is not lessened in width and requiring adequate visibility.

Need for the development

The County Structure Plan target of 500 new dwellings in the rural areas of the Borough up until 2016 has been exceeded. However, this is not seen as a valid reason to refuse small infill developments such as this which are required to meet a need for small dwellings in individual villages such as Grendon.

Trees

There are a number of trees within the site and close to boundary. Some will be lost if the development proceeds and additional landscaping can be secured as compensation for this. A number of other tress will also be retained near the boundaries of the site. 26 The most important tree in this respect is located within the boundary of 7 Church Way. There were concerns about this in relation to a previous scheme on this site because the development was proposed too close to it. This latest scheme moves the dwellings further away from the boundary with number 7 and means it is easier to protect this tree. Protection measures for this and any other trees to be retained can be secured by planning condition.

Possible contamination on site

For a number of reasons including the proximity to an adjacent former forge, the site is likely to be contaminated. At the request of the Council’s Environmental Health Officers, some work has been done to examine this. Further works to ensure this is not a problem can be secured by planning condition.

Ongoing dispute over rights of access

In response to concerns that the occupiers of the new dwellings will not enjoy rights of access to the site, the applicant maintains they will. It is uncertain who is correct but this is not a valid reason to justify refusal of this planning application.

Other matters

There have been concerns expressed about the effect of construction works on the stability of the Old Forge and also the related noise and disturbance that they will bring. There are other items of legislation to protect residents on these matters and therefore these concerns are not sufficient to justify refusal of the application.

Conclusion

Overall, there are considered to be no reasons to justify refusing this application.

RECOMMENDATION: Approve, subject to the following conditions:

1. The development shall be begun not later than the expiration of three years beginning with the date of this permission. 2. Prior to the commencement of the development, a scheme for the protection of the trees on, and in the vicinity of, the site that are to be retained during construction works shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority following a meeting on site and incorporating any amendments the local planning authority may require. The scheme shall be carried out concurrently with the development to the satisfaction of the local planning authority. 3. The site shall be landscaped in accordance with details to be submitted to the local planning authority prior to the commencement of the development and incorporating any amendments the local planning authority may require. The scheme shall be implemented concurrently with the development and shall be completed not later than the first planting season following the substantial completion of the development. Any trees and shrubs removed, dying, being severely damaged or becoming seriously diseased within five years of planting shall be replaced by trees and shrubs of similar size and species to those originally required to be planted or other species as may be agreed.

27 4. Representative samples of all external facing and roofing materials shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority before the development is commenced. The dwellings shall be constructed of natural local stone with slate roofing materials. 5. The areas shown for parking and turning on the approved plans shall be laid out and surfaced to the satisfaction of the local planning authority before the premises are occupied and shall be permanently set aside and reserved for the purpose. 6. The shared private drive serving the existing and proposed development is to be no less than 4.5m wide over the first 10m and must be hard-paved over the first 5m. Pedestrian to vehicle visibility over a height of 0.6m must be provided within splays of 2m x 2m on each side of the point of access. The strip of granite setts over the frontage of the site must be laid flush with the existing surface of the carriageway so that the available carriageway width is not further reduced. Any windows proposed on the highway frontage of the building must be of a type that opens inward only. 7. Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995 (or any order revoking and re-enacting that order), no extensions or other forms of enlargement to the residential development hereby permitted, nor the erection of porches or outbuildings shall take place without the prior approval of the local planning authority. 8. Development shall not begin until a scheme of investigation and assessment to identify the extent of any contamination on the site and the measures necessary to make the land fit for the proposed use has been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority and implemented including any amendments the local planning authority may require.

Reasons: 1. Required to be imposed pursuant to S51 of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004. 2. In the interests of amenity. 3. In the interests of amenity and to protect the amenities of occupiers of neighbouring properties. 4. In the interests of visual amenity. 5. In the interests of the safety and convenience of users of the adjoining highway/s. 6. In the interests of the safety and convenience of users of the adjoining highway/s. 7. In the interests of amenity. 8. To mitigate against any problems from contamination on the site.

28 3. Before any work begins on site, a meeting should be arranged between the developers and the Council's landscape officer to agree the precise measures for the protection of the trees to be retained in the vicinity of the site's boundaries. These should be in accordance with BS 5837. A protective fence must be erected to exclude access from as much of the root zone as possible. This should be supported with clause 8.2 of BS 5837, the height to be agreed on site. The routing of services to avoid roots being severed is also to be carefully considered at the initial site meeting. Any crown lifting which may be required will need consent and must be carried out in accordance with BS 3998. 4. The applicant is advised that planning permission does not automatically allow the construction of the vehicle crossing, details of which require the approval of the Highway Authority. In this regard you should contact the Area Maintenance Engineer, Northamptonshire County Council - Atkins, Highways Depot, Harborough Road, Brixworth, Northamptonshire, NN6 9BX, tel. (01604) 883400 prior to any construction/excavation works within the public highway. 5. Footpath TF16 passes through the proposed development. The following points should be taken in to account: The routes must be kept clear, unobstructed and safe for users at all times. No structures or materials may be placed on the right of way. Any damage to the surface of the path must be made good by the applicant, specifications for any repair or surfacing work must be approved by this office. If as a result of the development the right of way needs to be closed a Traffic Regulation Order will be required. An application form for such an order is available from Northamptonshire County Council, a fee is payable for this service and a period of six weeks notice is required.

BOROUGH COUNCIL OF WELLINGBOROUGH AGENDA ITEM

SITE VIEWING (Date of visit 20th June 2006 at 3.40 p.m.)

Regulatory Committee 21/06/2006

Report of the Executive Director

APPLICATION REF: WP/2006/0257/F

PROPOSAL: Garden Room/Beauty Salon.

LOCATION: 156 Station Road, Irchester, Wellingborough.

APPLICANT: Miss Joella Hemmings and Mr Jamie Bishop.

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

PROPOSAL AND DESCRIPTION OF SITE: As described above.

The site is a semi-detached dwellinghouse that is located on the outskirts of the village. At the front of the site is a wide grass verge with off road car parking available for several vehicles. At the rear of the site there is an existing shed erected close to the boundary that is approximately 2.25m high which sits on part of the intended footprint of the proposed structure. On the boundary with no. 158 is a section of wall that is approximately 2.5m high and fence panels of 1.8m and 1.5m in height. On the boundary with no. 154 are 1.8m high fence panels. The ground level of the back garden is flat.

It should be noted that if the purposed building was not to be used in part for business purposes it would be considered to be permitted development under The Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995, as amended.

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY: None recorded.

NATIONAL AND LOCAL PLANNING POLICY: Regional Spatial Strategy 8. Northamptonshire County Structure Plan - GS5 Borough of Wellingborough Local Plan - G1, H16 and E3 Supplementary Planning Guidance Residential Extensions: A Guide to Good Design, Parking and Planning Out Crime. Planning Policy Statement 1; Delivering Sustainable Development. Planning Policy Guidance 13, Transport Planning Policy Guidance 4; Industrial, Commercial Development and Small Firms. Planning Policy Statement 7; Sustainable Development in Rural Areas.

1 8

8 0

9 1 265600 265900 D 657 658

169 6

493000 167 493000 Borough CouncilOfWellingborough:LicenceNo.100018694.Published07/06/2006 © CrownCopyright.Allrightsreserved.

1 to 4 5

8 Garden Fields 181 Court 68.6m 1 171 132 B 6

5 1

4 1 6 8 1

t h

( 6

WP/2006/0257/F u

4 T

1 1 m)

Scale 1:1250

(

T u m

O ) 0

931 931 5

N 1

25 R A

155 RK A

D W 1

3 71.1m

G HT

145

El B

RO Su

b A

1 3 St

D 3

a 1

4 8

7 68.2m 1

R 4 7 MAN 1 WAY

1 3

2 2 5

6 9

8 1

8 493200 493200 1 657 658 265900 265600

23 T

72 a H c

19 k 30 SUMMARY OF REPLIES TO CONSULTATIONS/REPRESENTATIONS RECEIVED: 1. Irchester Parish Council – objects to the application and cites the following concerns:

• Access • Off road parking • Business will be in the middle of a row of residential properties

2. NCC Highways – in the experience of the Highway Authority this type of development does not generate inordinate numbers of visitors and despite the location of the site near to the bend in Station Road does not raise concern on highway safety grounds. Suggests that the Council satisfies itself with regards to the adequacy of the available parking accommodation.

3. Neighbours – no comment received.

ASSESSMENT Material planning considerations: • Compliance with policy and effect on neighbours amenities • Effect on the street scene • Crime and disorder

Compliance with policy and effect on neighbours’ amenities. It is accepted that the proposal will bring an element of a commercial use into an entirely residential area but with regards to Government advice PPG4 states in paragraph 15 that;

“Planning permission should normally be granted unless there are specific and significant objections, such as a relevant development plan policy, unacceptable noise, smell, safety, and health impacts or excessive traffic generation. The fact that an activity differs from the predominant land use in any locality is not a sufficient reason, in itself, for refusing planning permission.”

Local plan policies H16 and E3 say that proposals will only be permitted under the following circumstances;

• Will not have an undue adverse effect on the amenities of neighbouring properties, • No effect on the character and setting of the settlement • The scale is compatible with the existing or proposed development within the vicinity of the site.

It is clear from the application form that the intensity of the proposed use will be at a very low level and will therefore not generate excessive traffic and disturbance that could be caused by the comings and goings of business clients. Also, due to the nature of the intended business, it is apparent that there will not be any noise or smell emanating from the property that could be detrimental to the standard of amenities that are currently enjoyed by the occupiers of the neighbouring dwellings. The paucity of neighbour replies to the application publicity would seem to suggest that they are unconcerned with the proposal and the existing standard of amenities of the nearby residents can be protected by an appropriate condition that restricts the type of business operation that can be carried out from the building.

31 Effect on the street scene The building is situated at the rear of the dwelling and it will therefore not have any deleterious effect on the visual amenity of the street scene.

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

CONCLUSION Approve with conditions.

RECOMMENDATION: Approve subject to conditions.

Reasons: 1. Required to be imposed pursuant to S51 of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004. 2. In the interests of visual amenity. 3. To maintain planning control of the development in a residential area.

BOROUGH COUNCIL OF WELLINGBOROUGH AGENDA ITEM

Regulatory Committee 21/06/2006

Report of the Executive Director

APPLICATION REF: WP/2005/0527/O

PROPOSAL: Outline application for the erection of a dwelling.

LOCATION: Land at 53 Station Road, Earls Barton.

APPLICANT: Mr P Dodson.

NOTE: Attached is the Officer report prepared on this application in September 2005. The report was not presented to the Regulatory Committee as an earlier application on this site (WP/2005/0074/O) was refused by the Regulatory Committee for the following reason:

It is considered that the proposal represents an overdevelopment of the site which would lead to inadequate amenity space for the existing dwelling and have adverse effect on the amenities of the occupiers of neighbouring properties. The proposal would be contrary to Policies G1 (1 and 2) of the Borough of Wellingborough Local Plan (as follows):

POLICY G1

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

1. IS OF A HIGH STANDARD OF DESIGN WHICH RESPECTS AND ENHANCES THE CHARACTER OF ITS SURROUNDINGS;

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

Application WP/2005/0074/O is subject to an Appeal Hearing which is scheduled for 28th June 2006. The applicant’s have indicated that they would ask the Planning Inspectorate for the Appeal to be Withdrawn and the Hearing cancelled, should planning permission be granted for the current application which is the subject of the attached report. In addition, they are now happy for conditions to be attached to any grant of planning permission as follows:

(i) The development to be restricted to single storey only. (ii) The parking area for the new dwelling to be reduce in level to prevent any possible overlooking of the garden of no. 57 l ) S ( H 2

ub P 8 ( 4 e ( S Th an t w TCB 2 a S 9

78.0m 33

485100 O 485300

B M 7 2 8

Borough Council Of Wellingborough: Licence No.100018694. Published( 07/06/2006.14m

4 0 LB

1 852 38 (

2 3

263700 6 263700 O

P 4

2 5 Wks 4 y 1 8

to 5 2

8 Harco 1 a 5 H u 14 arcouMe rt 4 ws 3 Squ rt 7

ar 4 e 9 2 2

1 8

7 2

9 5

2 a 4b 3

3 1

8 y 1

e 1

21 2 g

25 9 r 7

3 2 S 2 h

80.2m c

r 6

1 u

3 1 h C B

Museum

4 3 9

Tank 7 14

21 24

636 636 2 4

5 B

2 L 1 ACKW d ELL

Club r a

h 3 1

c 4 r o 2

5 3

4 5

4 1

Bowling Green 1 3 Tennis

Court

5 7

7 1 75.6m 3 Tennis B

Court 48 E ta S S I b

R u S N l a E

635 8 635 0

4 O 5

X Y

9 6 W

S 9 2 3 8 2 N O S a L

0 I 5

W 1

70.4m 1

B 62

1 4

70 3

T 8 1

N 263400 R 263400

O 485100 485300

A 852 ScaleD 1:1250 80 33 (iii) Screen fencing and planting to be provided along the southern boundary of the retained garden to no. 53

At the time of drafting this Note a re-consultation exercise is being carried out with all interested persons. Any responses received will be reported in the Late Letters List.

In the light of this latest offer by the applicants, it is RECOMMENDED that planning permission be granted in accordance with the report attached and the imposition of extra conditions as indicated above.

BOROUGH COUNCIL OF WELLINGBOROUGH AGENDA ITEM

Regulatory Committee 21/06/2006

Report of the Executive Director

APPLICATION REF: WP/2005/0527/O

PROPOSAL: Outline application for the erection of a dwelling.

LOCATION: Land at 53 Station Road, Earls Barton.

APPLICANT: Mr P Dodson.

This application has been referred to the Regulatory Committee because three letters of representation have been received from occupiers of neighbouring dwellings.

PROPOSAL AND DESCRIPTION OF SITE: Outline application for one dwelling with siting and access to be determined at this stage. This application differs from the previously refused scheme by way of reducing the amount of off road parking space available for the occupiers of the proposed dwelling and thereby increasing the area of amenity space for the residents of the existing dwellinghouse.

The site is the garden area to the side and rear of no. 53 Station Road. The existing dwelling has a large attached garage that utilises vehicular access from a highway to the north of the site which follows an easterly direction and subsequently narrows to a footpath through to Saxon Rise. In the south-western corner of the site is an off road parking which is served by a recently constructed vehicular access from Station Road.

The ground level of the site falls generally in a southerly direction but it also perceptibly slopes down to the east towards the rear of the neighbouring dwelling in Saxon Rise which is set down at a lower level than the application land.

The site has the benefit of fences on its northern, eastern and southern boundaries and also on the boundaries are a variety of trees and shrubs which include three limes trees that are the subject of a Tree Preservation Order.

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY: WP/2003/0176/F New vehicular access and parking – conditionally approved.

WP/2003/0331/O Erection of a new single storey dwelling to the rear of existing dwelling – refused.

The reason for refusal on decision notice WP/2003/0331/O is “The proposed development would result in unacceptable harm being caused to lime trees to the rear 35 of the site that are the subject of Tree Preservation Order and is therefore contrary to Policy G21 of the Adopted Borough of Wellingborough Local Plan 1999”.

WP/2005/0074/O Outline application for erection of a dwelling – refused and Appeal lodged.

The reason for refusal on decision notice WP/2005/0074/O is “It is considered that the proposal represents an overdevelopment of the site which would lead to inadequate amenity space for the existing dwelling and have adverse effect on the amenities of the occupiers of neighbouring properties. The proposal would be contrary to Policies G1 (1 and 2) of the Borough of Wellingborough Local Plan”.

53 Station Road, Earls Barton Tree Preservation Order 2003. T9/92 - Consent to remove tree T4 subject to Tree Preservation Order 53 Station Road, Earls Barton.

The reason for granting consent to cut down the tree is specified as influence on the foundations of a nearby property.

NATIONAL AND LOCAL PLANNING POLICY: Northamptonshire County Structure Plan – GS5, H1, H2, H3 and H6. Borough of Wellingborough Local Plan - G1, G4, G21, H1, H2, H12 and T9. Supplementary Planning Guidance – Parking, Trees on Development Sites, Building Better Places and Planning Out Crime. Planning Policy Statement 1; Delivering Sustainable Development. Planning Policy Guidance 3; Housing. Planning Policy Statement 7; Sustainable Development in Rural Areas. Planning Policy Statement 23; Planning and Pollution Control Annex 2: Development on Land Affected by Contamination. Northants County Council Design Guide for Residential Roads.

SUMMARY OF REPLIES TO CONSULTATIONS/REPRESENTATIONS RECEIVED: 1. NCC Highways – does not object to the proposal but offers the following advice:

• Identifies the existence of a Public Right of Way that runs beyond the northern boundary of the application site. • The Council should satisfy itself with regards the adequacy of the off road parking provision for the existing and proposed sites. • Any gates at the point of entry to open inwards only. • Suggestion that the applicant discusses the refuse collection aspects of the proposal with the Borough Council of Wellingborough.

2. Earls Barton Parish Council – no comment received.

3. Environmental Protection – request the submission of an Environmental Risk Assessment before devolvement commences to assess the potential of contamination of the site.

4. Landscape Officer – does not object to the proposal and comments that it would be possible to develop the site and give the TPO trees protection in accordance with BS5837 by way of a condition.

5. Property Services – no comments.

36 6. Neighbours - letters of objection have been received from and on behalf of the occupier of 57 Station Road and comments have been received from the occupiers of 9 and 10 Saxon Rise and 51 Station Road. The writers have raised the following issues:

• Concern regarding the effect of the development on the TPO trees on the site. • Reference to remedial works undertaken to nearby dwellings. • Drainage concerns. • Loss of privacy. • Reference to previously undertaken tree works and future removal of trees. • Noise and disturbance from the proposal site. • Differing ground levels between the application site and surrounding land which will need to be retained as a result of the development and effect on adjacent screening trees. • Overdevelopment of the site and opinion that a large house needs a large garden. • Query regarding proposed lowering the off road parking area without affecting the drive way to it. • Access and highway danger for vehicles and pedestrians. • Increase in traffic in the vicinity due to new development in recent years.

ASSESSMENT: Material planning considerations:

• Compliance with policy • Effect on the visual amenity of the area • Effect on trees • Effect on neighbours amenities • Parking and traffic • Crime and disorder

Compliance with policy The site is brownfield in nature and within the built up confines of a limited development village. The proposal therefore is considered to accord with the elements of national guidance and development plan policies that relate to achieving new housing development in the rural area on previously developed sites within the identified village policy lines of limited development villages.

Effect on the visual amenity of the area Mention has been made of overdevelopment of the site but the proposed arrangement of the new dwelling in relation to no. 53 reflects the development pattern already established by the juxtaposition of no. 51 and no. 53. Furthermore it is considered that the proposed dwelling will be hardly seen from Station Road and will have little visual impact from the Public Right of Way that abuts the site due to the trees and its position. Also, the appearance of any scheme submitted for reserved matters can be adequately controlled at that stage.

Effect on trees Application WP/2005/0074/O was accompanied by a report to assess the potential for damage to the TPO trees on the site. It is accepted that there were some minor errors in the report but its methodology and conclusions have been studied by the Council’s Landscape Officer and were found to be sound. The circumstances concerning the 37 TPO have not changed and it is therefore considered that the site can be developed without undue harm to the trees but a condition requiring the protection of the trees during development work is recommended.

Effect on neighbours’ amenities It is possible that the occupiers of adjacent dwellings will have their existing standard of residential amenity affected to some extent by the proposed development but it considered that any diminution is not sufficient to withhold planning consent for the following reasons:

• The revised rear amenity space for the existing dwelling measures as 13m deep and 20m wide at the furthest points. The main amenity area of the proposed dwelling has average measurement of 16m x 9m. The Building Better Places SPG mentions the following with regards to spacing standards:

Minimum distance of 21 m between rear facing windows of neighbouring dwellings and 12 m between rear facing windows and ones in the flank of another wall. A minimum rear garden depth of 10.5m.

• With regards privacy of no. 10 Saxon Rise it is accepted that the ground level falls down towards the east and the measured privacy distance of 17m between them is not up to the suggested standard mentioned in the Building Better Places SPG. However the proposed dwelling does not directly face the rear elevation of no. 10 Saxon and the standard of privacy will be protected by the TPO trees on the boundary together with the other intervening trees.

• The occupier of no. 57 has objected to loss of privacy by way of the potential use of the new vehicular off road car parking spaces because of the elevated nature of the off road car parking space due to the fall of the land. It is considered that this objection cannot be sustained because the off road car parking space is existing and could be used currently by the occupiers of no. 53. Mention has been made of the intended works to lower the level of the off car parking area but any excavations can be controlled by way of a condition to ensure that the gradient of the car parking area does not exceed 1:15 to comply with highway standards. There is some tree and shrub planting on the common boundary that goes some way towards concealing the occupier of no. 57 from overlooking by the likely pedestrian traffic to and from the proposed dwelling to its off road parking area. The distance from the rear wall of no. 53 to the flank wall of no. 57 is approximately 27m. The oblique distance from the from the nearest part of the rear wall of the proposed dwelling to the closest part of no. 57 is approximately 17m but large parts of the rear garden of no. 57 are however beyond the 21m distance stated in the Building Better Places SPG. In the interests of completeness in assessing the amenity for the occupiers of no. 57 it is considered prudent to mention the planning history of the land to the south of the application site adjacent to no. 57:

WP/92/0093/O Erection of single storey dwelling – conditionally approved. WP/95/0085/O Renewal of outline planning permission WP/92/0093 – conditionally approved. WP/98/0102/O Renewal of outline planning permission WP/95/0085/O – conditionally approved. WP/2001/0029/O Renewal of outline planning permission WP/98/0102/O – conditionally approved.

38 Parking and traffic The comments of the nearby residents are noted but the Highway Authority has not objected to the proposal on the grounds of highway safety. The off street parking to the site has been approved under a previous application (WP/2003/2003/0176/F refers) and the existing dwelling has adequate off street vehicular parking provision and access thereto. The revised off road car parking area is sufficient to accommodate two car parking spaces.

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

RECOMMENDATION: Approve with conditions.

1. Application for approval of reserved matters must be made not later than the expiration of three years beginning with the date of this permission and the development must be begun not later than whichever is the later of the following dates: (a) the expiration of five years from the date of this permission; or (b) the expiration of two years from the final approval of the reserved matters or, in the case of approval on different dates, the final approval of the last such matter to be approved. 2. Before any development is commenced, detailed plans, drawings and particulars of the design and external appearance of the proposed development together with landscaping and screen walls/fences shall be submitted to and approved by the local planning authority and the development shall be carried out in accordance therewith. 3. Before development commences a scheme in accordance with BS5837 for the protection of the trees on the site that are subject to a Tree Preservation Order shall be submitted to the local planning authority and approved in writing. The approved scheme shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the local authority during the course of the construction and shall be maintained until all construction work has ceased. 4. Before development commences the finished floor level of the hereby approved dwelling shall be submitted to the local planning authority and approved in writing. The development shall be carried in accordance with the approved details unless otherwise agreed in writing by the local planning authority. 5. The gradient of the off road car parking area of the hereby approved dwelling in the rear of the public highway shall not exceed 1:15. 6. Before development is commenced an Environmental Risk Assessment (ERA) shall be submitted to the local planning authority and approved in writing. Should the ERA reveal that the site is subject to contamination a scheme for its remediation shall also be submitted to the local authority and approved in writing. The approved remediation scheme shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the local planning authority before the dwelling is first occupied.

Reasons: 1. Required to be imposed pursuant to Section 92 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990. 2. To secure satisfactorily planned development. 39 3. In Order to protect the trees on the site that is subject of a Tree Preservation Order. 4. In order to protect the standard of residential amenity of nearby occupiers. 5. In the interests of highway safety. 6. In order to prevent exposure of the occupiers of the dwelling from contamination.

INFORMATIVE/S 1. Pursuant to Section 54A of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, the proposed development complies with the applicable development plan policies and there are no other material considerations that would constitute sustainable grounds for refusal. These include specifically the following policies: Northamptonshire County Structure Plan - GS5, H1, H2, H3 and H6 Borough of Wellingborough Local Plan - G1, G4, G21, H1, H2, H12 and T9 Supplementary Planning Guidance - Parking, Trees on Development Sites, Building Better Places and Planning Out Crime. Planning Policy Statement 1; Delivering Sustainable Development Planning Policy Guidance 3; Housing Planning Policy Statement 7; Sustainable Development in Rural Areas Planning Policy Statement 23; Planning and Pollution Control Annex 2: Development on Land Affected by Contamination Northants County Council Design Guide for Residential Roads. 2. The applicant is advised that this decision relates to the following drawing numbers received on the date shown: 3rd August 2005

BOROUGH COUNCIL OF WELLINGBOROUGH AGENDA ITEM

Regulatory Committee 21/06/2006

Report of the Executive Director

APPLICATION REF: WP/2006/0093/F

PROPOSAL: Change of use to road sweepers' depot and erection of workshop - retrospective application - additional information.

LOCATION: Land to the east of Furnace Lane, Finedon Sidings, Little Harrowden, Wellingborough.

APPLICANT: Greenplant Sweepers Limited.

PROPOSAL AND DESCRIPTION OF SITE: (As above). The applicant’s agent advises that the proposal is to retain the use of the land and premises as a vehicular road sweepers’ depot. The site is situated at the eastern side of Furnace Lane on the Finedon Road industrial estate alongside the Midland Railway tracks. It comprises a level rectangular area of land measuring approximately 54m by 21m. Immediately to the north is the Michael Farrow Stonemason’s yard. To the south is Bobtail Lodge Kennels. On the opposite side of Furnace Lane is the Goddard’s warehousing site and Murphy’s Civil Engineering contractor’s Depot. The site originally contained a bungalow although this fell into disrepair many years ago. The land, together with land to the north which is currently occupied by the stonemason’s yard, was later owned in association with Bobtail Kennels. Part was sold and the stonemason’s yard developed and the remainder is now occupied by Green Plant Sweeper’s Limited.

The application seeks full planning permission for the change of use of the land to a road sweeper’s depot for Green Plant Sweeper’s Limited. It is a retrospective application as the use began last year. The company uses the site for the storage and maintenance of their road sweepers and there are currently 8 vehicles operating from the site. These leave from approximately 8 a.m. each morning to clean roads within the wider area in connection with civil engineering works that are taking place. They return from the middle afternoon onwards. Apart from staff vehicles, the number of vehicular movements associated with the use is 16, comprising two per vehicle movements per sweeper day i.e. one in and one out.

The site is enclosed by a 2m high galvanised fence and a small building has been erected in which the vehicles can be serviced. This is located towards the north- eastern corner of the site and measures approximately 11.9m by 9.05m with a ridge height of approximately 5.2m. The building is finished in a dark green colour.

This application is referred to Committee due to the number of objections received

B 50.1m RH 1.22m

D e f

V V

RH F V 2m

1.2 V

Works

726 726 V

1 V

Compton House

725 725 51.6m 3 Bobtail B Lodge

l D

BM 52.07m ( @ Kennels

272400 272400 489500 896 Furnace Lane Industrial Estate 489700

Scale 1:1250 V 41 RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY: None Shown on history card.

NATIONAL AND LOCAL PLANNING POLICY: PPS 1, PPS7, PPG13 County Structure Plan: GS3, GS5, RE3 Local Plan: G1, LH1 Supplementary Planning Guidance - Parking and Planning Out Crime

SUMMARY OF REPLIES TO CONSULTATIONS/REPRESENTATIONS RECEIVED: 1. Parish Council – is concerned that in respect of retrospective applications it is perceived by many that the power of the Borough Council to refuse such applications is limited. However notwithstanding this observation, the Parish Council requests that a flood risk assessment be carried out, the site be provided with a metered water supply (as some residents have expressed concerns that the company is drawing water from a fire hydrant) and that all waste is disposed of legally and in an environmentally sensitive manner. It is understood that Greenplant Sweepers has an Operator’s licence for 2 no. vehicles but the application is for 8 vehicles. Therefore any planning permission granted should be subject to a new Operators licence being obtained.

2. County Highway Authority – has expressed concern historically over the impact of any intensification of traffic on Furnace Lane, which is considered to be a substandard highway in terms of width and condition, particularly with regard to large heavy vehicles. Comments are therefore made on the information that accompanies the application relating to numbers of vehicles operating from the site and the vehicle movements stated. Queries whether the demolition and remediation work undertaken by Green Plant will result in spoil heaps appearing on the site. Suggests that even if each vehicle only makes one movement from the site each day that this will still result in16 large vehicle movements and 16 car movements daily and this is likely to be the ‘best case scenario’. Bearing in mind that the previous use of the site was for a single residential unit, the stated figures for vehicle movements represent a significant intensification of traffic generation. No details of access arrangements are included with the application details. It is expected that any new development at Finedon Sidings that introduces additional heavy vehicle movements should provide for highway improvements to offset the impact of the development. Therefore the developer is expected to provide:

1. Confirmation as to the exact proposed usage of the site – and thereby the expected vehicles attracted to the site, including rough dimensions and tonnages, both laden and unladen. 2. Details of any proposed access arrangements 3. Details of any propose mitigation works, i.e. signing, passing bays etc.

3. The applicant’s agents responded to the above queries by the Highway Authority by indicating that:

1. The exact usage of the site is road sweepers’ depot where road sweepers are stored when not in use and where they are maintained within the building on the land. 2. The road sweepers are 7.5 ton commercial vehicles. 3. Green Plant Sweepers Limited who operate from the site are a completely different company from Green Plant and they use the Finedon Sidings site 42 purely to store and maintain road sweepers. The company is not involved in demolition or remediation works and such activities would not take place on the site or operate from it. 4. The existing access is some 7m wide and is situated in the middle of the frontage to Furnace Lane. Along the frontage is a 2m high fence constructed of metal railings which is set back from the highway. 5. No mitigation works are proposed in respect of highway matters associated with the use. The number of vehicle movements per day would comprise 8 road sweepers leaving the site in the morning and returning later in the day (as already indicated above). In addition, drivers of the road sweepers would arrive by car although in a worse case scenario this would be a maximum of 8 cars arriving in the morning and leaving in the afternoon. This volume of traffic is very low in comparison to the total volume of traffic using Furnace Lane and would not represent a material increase in traffic movements on the road.

4. Further comments made by the County Highway Authority on receipt of this further information were as follows:

I do not consider that the information submitted by the applicant is sufficient for me to give a full highways response to the proposals. Whilst I appreciate that the applicant’s agents have provided a brief written description of the access to the site, I would expect of development of this scale to include the submission of plans detailing the actual access arrangements so that I can give consideration to the practicality and safety of these arrangements, particularly bearing in mind the intensification of use.

I would also dispute the suggestion with Wilbraham Associates letter of the 27th March 2006 that the traffic generated by the development is not material. Furnace Lane is significantly substandard in terms of width and construction, with particular regard to Heavier or Larger vehicles. The application as submitted would result in the intensification of large vehicles movements on this road and so has to be considered as material. I would consider that mitigation is fully justified in this case and would expect to see substantive proposals from the applicant to this effect, specifically with regard to the provision of formalised passing bays and signage provided either via Section 278 works or Section 106 contribution.

Should the applicant be unwilling to provide additional information to satisfy the above queries then I would request that you refer the matter back to me so that I can provide final comments based upon the information submitted to date.

5. The applicant’s agents responded in writing to suggest that they were happy to accept a condition to restrict the number of vehicles into and out of the site each day to 16 (i.e. 8 in and 8 out). They are also surprised that the Highway Authority is looking for substantive proposals including the provision of formalised passing bays and signage, particularly given that passing bays already exist on the single carriageway section of the road. They conclude “As indicated in my letter of 27th March my clients are not prepared to carry out any such works”.

43 6. The County Highway Authority has further responded to suggest that in the light of the above comments the proposal be refused. This is on the basis that the retrospective and unauthorised use by Greenplant Sweepers leads to an over intensification of use of a substandard highway at Finedon Sidings with particular regard to Heavy/Large Vehicles.

7. The County Highway Authority is fully prepared to support the local planning authority in defending such a decision should an appeal be lodged.

8. Environment Agency – no objection to the application as submitted but makes informative comments for the applicant’s attention relating to surface water drainage, safeguards in respect of any storage of oils, fuels and chemicals, cleaning and washing operations and tipping on the site. It is also pointed out that the site lies within 250 metres of a former landfill site.

9. Third Parties - letters from 5 local residents and the Furnace Lane Action Group raising objections as follows: (i) site is located on a flood plain and therefore a full flood risk assessment is required; (ii) condition of the single track substandard access and minimal maintenance of the same, is exacerbated by Green Plant Sweepers now making use of it; (iii) vehicles quite regularly ‘fall off’ the access road blocking the same and as there is not any footpath, it is dangerous for pedestrians; (iii) damage to a nearby field that is designated as being of specific environmental interest; (iv) water taken from fire hydrant; (v) if permission is granted the applicant should be made to contribute to improvements to the road; (vi) the road is used as a ‘rat run’ from Wellingborough; (vii) the building has been erected on the site 7 months ago without planning permission.; (viii) contamination of the watercourse could occur from washing of the vehicles and the dumping of the muck they have picked up; (ix) Green Plant Sweepers only has an Operators Licence for 2 vehicles; (x) the times that pressure washing of vehicles is allowed should be restricted as the operation is very noisy when the vehicles run their engines at high revs. Resulting in spray to the neighbouring property, also there is no mains drainage in the area and neighbouring soakaways are therefore overflowing at times. Therefore they need to provide their own soakaway; (xii) there could be health and safety issues associated with the use, and (xi) two building have been erected on the site the second being used by Green Plant as an office on the site of Goddard Warehousing.

ASSESSMENT: The issues that need to be considered in the determination of this application are as follows: (i) Planning Policy (ii) Highway Issues (iii) Affect on amenity. (iv) Responding to the points made by those making representations

(i) The Borough of Wellingborough Local Plan policy LH1 relates to Finedon Sidings. Within the designated area the policy allows for development subject to the following criteria:

(a) the development would not be likely to lead to an increase in traffic movements in the case of extensions to buildings they are to meet specific ancillary and associated uses 44 (b) additional landscaping is provided at the boundaries with open countryside.

In respect of the above policy the development clearly has led to an increase in traffic movements and this issue is considered in the next point below.

(ii) As already indicated above, the County Highway Authority is objecting strongly to the proposal and is recommending refusal on the grounds that the retrospective and unauthorised use by Greenplant Sweepers leads to an over intensification of use of a substandard highway at Finedon Sidings with particular regard to Heavy/Large Vehicles.

(iii) There is some impact upon the amenity of the neighbours by virtue of the hours of operation of the site especially in relation to the washing of vehicles. An incidental point arising in respect of the latter is the allegation that water is taken from the emergency source (fire hydrant) although this matter has is not a planning consideration and it has not in any event been substantiated by the local planning authority).

(iv) The recommendation will address the concerns of those making responses to the consultations undertaken. The applicant’s have submitted a flood risk assessment to support the application and sent a copy of the same to the Environment Agency.

In conclusion and on balance the present unauthorised retrospective use of the site by Green Plant sweepers is unacceptable as it exacerbates an already congested substandard access road to Finedon sidings. It is therefore contrary in particular to Policy LH1 in the adopted Local Plan and therefore should not be regularised by the grant of planning permission.

RECOMMENDATION: Refuse.

1. The retention of the current retrospective use of the application site and buildings by Greenplant Sweepers Limited would consolidate and exacerbate an intensification of use of a substandard highway at Finedon Sidings with particular regard to Heavy/Large vehicles. It is therefore contrary to policies G1(3, 4 and 12); T9 (1 and 4); and LH1 (1A).

These policies are set out and expressed as follows:

POLICY G1

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

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

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

12. IS CONSISTENT WITH THE PRINCIPLES OF SUSTAINABILITY.

POLICY T9

IN RELATION TO PROPOSALS INVOLVING THE LAYOUT OF NEW ROADS, A CHANGE IN THE CHARACTER OR VOLUME OF TRAFFIC, OR THE FORMATION OR ALTERATION OF A VEHICULAR ACCESS, PLANNING PERMISSION WILL BE GRANTED WHERE

1. HIGHWAY STANDARDS ARE SATISFACTORILY MET;

4. SATISFACTORY PROVISION IS MADE FOR PEDESTRIANS, CYCLISTS, THE DISABLED AND PUBLIC TRANSPORT, WHERE APPROPRIATE

POLICY LH1

1. PLANNING PERMISSION WILL ONLY BE GRANTED FOR INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AT FINEDON SIDINGS, LITTLE HARROWDEN, INSIDE THE LIMITS OF DEVELOPMENT AS SHOWN ON THE PROPOSALS MAP, PROVIDED THAT:

A. THE DEVELOPMENT WOULD NOT BE LIKELY TO LEAD TO AN INCREASE IN TRAFFIC MOVEMENTS. 46

BOROUGH COUNCIL OF WELLINGBOROUGH AGENDA ITEM

Regulatory Committee 21/06/2006

Report of the Executive Director

APPLICATION REF: WP/2006/0148/RM

PROPOSAL: Erection of 11 dwellings and associated works.

LOCATION: Land adjacent to 22 Regent Street, Finedon, Wellingborough.

APPLICANT: Albemarle Homes Limited.

PROPOSAL AND DESCRIPTION OF SITE: (As above). The site (1280 sq metres) is that of a former factory with some structures remaining in use at present as a timber yard/workshop. It is located in the centre of the settlement and surrounded by predominantly residential development (of various styles, types and ages) although there is a Health Centre and Church to the east and some commercial interspersed with residential properties to the north on Church Street. The site is set in a dip in terms of the landform falling gently from the level of Regent Street and rising slightly towards Church Street.

The proposal is for the erection of two blocks of 11 flats (2 one bedroom; 3 two bedroom; 6 three bedroom; in total). One T shaped block of 5 flats (with the western end comprising gabled elements set both forward and back from the line of the front and rear elevations) but otherwise of terraced form, is set facing Regent Street at the front of the site. It has a simple pitched roof and fairly narrow casement style symmetrical fenestration surmounted by distinctive brick coursing. The block of flats set at the rear of the site in respect of plots 6 to 11 is of simple pitched roof gable ended staggered form. Plots 6 and 7 at the eastern end are set back from the line of the front elevation of the rest of the block. This block has some rooms in the roof space lit by roof lights. The central area of the site provides for vehicular access from Regent Street and 11 car parking spaces.

This is a Reserved Matters application with all matters now to be determined save for the landscaping of the site. A series of outline planning permissions for 11 residential units have been granted on this site as renewals of planning permission, following the original grant of planning permission for the residential development of 11 houses in 1993.

This application is referred to Committee for decision as it falls within the threshold and scale of developments that requires a Planning Obligation S106 Planning Agreement to be entered into.

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY: A very extensive planning history is indicated on the history card records for this site dating from 1964 to date relating to various extensions and alterations and changes of

2 C 6 W h 6 21 i 4 te c o

a T 15 2 t E 491500 2 F 491700 O s 9 WP/2006/0148/RM N © Crown Copyright. All rights reserved. a r c c T Borough Council Of Wellingborough: Licence No.100018694. Published 07/06/2006 t h o a E r r 916 y d R C

o 7

2 272100 L 0 272100 u r AN t

E 1

1 1 6

1 1 a 4

0 49 8 Club Appletree Tudor Gate B Town Hall

ERRY G Library Court (Hotel)

R 1 7 5 PC 3 4 EE

NR LB 5 ( OAD 41 35 39 9 to 2 37

1 1

3 3

2 2 2 T 8 C B 19a

t ( 23 C 26

's 19

2 y 2 2

r 4

a B

M t

o k

2 1 S 14

1 9

4 1 1 2 PH

6 0

720 1 to 12 720

4 2 H 15 P

9 1 1

2 Ct 1 s 4 A y' PA ar F T M 3

16 t F 1 E

S 2

1 L T R

1 E E

E 4 R

2 o

2 C 7 2 R 0

K T 2 AC 1 9 5 S to L 1 L Church B E

R W 6 2

2 I 7 D G

E 2

th 5 1

l 1 1 a I 1 He tre R en O C E 1 AR N U S

Q 1

T 4 S T 1 h O N e

Factory E S O N 1 B ta ld 2 Amenic House L r

H E Th 10 O 4

D ll C 3 e 6 T

R 5 S e ta g 18

e r 1 H n 22 t 1 a

ll P Wentw 719 5 719 4 1 L O 1 Fa A 4 U 2 W N Mackworth S D 7 1 9

T 9 Green L P

7 A

E 8 L

E 1 1 7 9 3 N R 6 6

ST E

T 2

N 1 1 7 E 9

2 2 R 1 0 1 5 2 10

18 W e H r M 2 a IT 5 W S 1 U 0 N B D M ( A 8 L y 0

E r TCB .2

o 1 0 t 3 C c 10 L 5 a x O F Club l E S

Te E

1 271800 0 271800 7

1 491500 491700 4 1 109 916 to 2 2 0 8 2 2 4 El Sub Sta 5 Scale 1:1250 28

IVY LANE

1 3

3 1 3 9 5

E 80.2m

N 47 use involving potato store and garage, light industrial, storage as well as cutting of wood materials and sales.; prior to the first granting of consent for residential development in 1988.

NATIONAL AND LOCAL PLANNING POLICY: PPS 1, PPG 3. County Structure Plan: GS3, GS5 and H3. Local Plan: G1 and H12. SPG: II.

SUMMARY OF REPLIES TO CONSULTATIONS/REPRESENTATIONS RECEIVED: 1. County Highway Authority – stipulates standard conditions in respect of the access.

2. Environment Agency – no comments to make.

3. Environmental Health Officer – further Environmental Risk Assessment work is required as a result of the initial investigations undertaken. A planning condition should accordingly be imposed.

4. Conservation Officer – suggests conditions are required regarding details to be submitted in respect of windows, doors, eaves and verges. Queries the height of the roof of units at the back of the site.

5. Third Parties – one letter has been received from a resident of Church Street objecting on the grounds of loss of privacy and light to the occupants of dwellings in Church Street and expressing concerns about the need for appropriate boundary treatment and the capacity of local sewers.

ASSESSMENT: The issues that need to be taken into account in the determination of this application are: (i) planning policy and the suitability of the site for residential development; (ii) impact of the development upon the amenities of neighbouring residential occupiers; (iii) response to points arising from replies made to consultations; and (iv) Planning Obligation considerations.

(i) In terms of present planning policy considerations there is a presumption in favour of redevelopment of a site of this kind and present use in this type of location. The national planning policy guidance advice is to concentrate new development within existing settlements whenever this is possible and to re-use existing sites. This guidance is reflected in the Development Plan policy framework. At the strategic level the overall thrust is one of urban concentration of development and rural restraint overall in the interests of sustainability. The principle of development of the site has already been accepted with the granting of outline planning permission.

(ii) The site is to be developed by the careful positioning and laying out of the new dwellings so that any impact upon surrounding properties in respect of residential amenity is negligible. There is sufficient separation distance in accordance with the recommendations of Supplementary Guidance and the need for a floor levels survey can be stipulated by condition (Proposed condition no. 5 refers) to cover the concern regarding the height of the units at the rear of the site. The capacity of sewers is a matter covered under other statutory requirements administered by other organisations and it has not been stipulated as a constraint to development in this instance. There are not considered to be any crime and disorder issues arising in 48 respect of this application.

(iii) The necessity of an environmental risk assessment mentioned by the Environmental Health Officer can be secured by a condition (Proposed condition no. 2 refers). Likewise conditions can be stipulated to secure a satisfactory means of access to the site in technical terms (Proposed conditions nos. 6 and 7 refer). The concerns raised by a local resident in respect of loss of light and overlooking are not felt to be relevant due to the separation distance from the proposal to existing residential properties. In addition a three storey flat development has been completed recently on a similar site close by.

(iv) There was not a Section 106 Legal Agreement imposed at the Outline application stage and therefore it is not now appropriate or reasonable to impose such a requirement at the Reserved Matters stage.

RECOMMENDATION: Approve.

1. Representative samples of all external facing and roofing materials shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority before the development is commenced. 2. Development shall not begin until a scheme to deal with contamination of the site has been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The scheme shall include an investigation and assessment to identify the extent of contamination and the measures to be taken to avoid risk to the public/buildings/environment when the site is developed. 3. The site shall be landscaped and planted with trees and shrubs in accordance with a comprehensive scheme which shall be submitted to and approved by the local planning authority before the development is commenced. The scheme shall be implemented concurrently with the development and shall be completed not later than the first planting season following the substantial completion of the development. Any trees and shrubs removed, dying, being severely damaged or becoming seriously diseased within five years of planting shall be replaced by trees and shrubs of similar size and species to those originally required to be planted or other species as may be agreed. 4. Prior to the commencement of development details of the provision for the storage of refuse shall be submitted in writing for approval by the local planning authority and implemented prior to the occupation of the first residential unit. 5. Prior to the commencement of development a survey of site levels and finished floor levels shall be carried out and the results plotted on a drawing to be submitted for approval to the local planning authority. 6. Visibility splays of 2.4m x 2.4m above a height of 0.6m must be provided and maintained wherever appropriate but particularly at the point of access from parking space number 4. 7. The point of access to the proposed development must have a carriageway width of 4.8m and a minimum of 2m x 1m wide service strips throughout and the footway along the Regent Street frontage of the site must be widened at the expense of the developer to 1.8m. 8. Prior to the commencement of development full details and specifications in respect of the design of windows, doors, eaves and verges must be submitted to and agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority. 9. A scheme for screen fencing/walling shall be agreed with the local planning authority before the start of construction. The agreed scheme shall be 49 implemented to the satisfaction of the local planning authority before the houses are occupied. 10. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the amended plan(s) deposited with the local planning authority on 2/06/2006.

Reasons: 1. In the interests of amenity. 2. To avoid any detrimental effects from contamination. 3. In the interests of visual amenity. 4. In the interests of amenity. 5. In the interests of amenity and to secure the proper planning of the development. 6. In the interests of highway safety. 7. In the interests of highway safety. 8. In the interests of good design and appearance. 9. In the interests of amenity and privacy. 10. To ensure that the development is carried out in accordance with the agreed amendments.

INFORMATIVE/S: 1. Pursuant to Section 38 (6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004, the proposed development complies with the applicable development plan policies and there are no other material considerations that would constitute sustainable grounds for refusal. These include specifically the following policies:GS4, H6 and H7 of the Northamptonshire County Structure Plan and G1, H1, H5, H12 and L7 of the Borough of Wellingborough Local Plan. 2. The applicant is advised that this decision relates to the following drawing numbers received on the date shown: Drawing Number: Date Received: 240 -2; 10;11;13;14;15 and 16A 07/03/2006 and 08/06/2006 3. The applicant is advised that planning permission does not automatically allow the construction of the vehicle crossing, details of which require the approval of the Highway Authority. In this regard you should contact the Team Leader Regulations, Sustainable Transport, Riverside House, Riverside Way, Northampton NN1 5NX prior to any construction/excavation works within the public highway. 50

BOROUGH COUNCIL OF WELLINGBOROUGH AGENDA ITEM

Regulatory Committee 21/06/2006

Report of the Executive Director

APPLICATION REF: WP/2006/0170/F

PROPOSAL: Construction of detached dwelling.

LOCATION: Land adjoining 5 South Street, Isham.

APPLICANT: Mr and Mrs Farmiloe.

PROPOSAL: (As above). The proposal is for the erection of a two-storey hipped and gabled roof new dwelling, with projections to the font and rear, on a vacant infill site within the Conservation Area of the village of Isham. It is located between numbers 3 and 5 South Street and borders Park Close to the rear. The site is approximately 336 sq metres in area. The roof of the wing to the rear is set at a much lower level than the main roof height of the property. Materials are to be coursed limestone with red/brown pantiles. The design is conventional and traditional with extensive sympathetic detailing. The new dwelling is to comprise an integral single garage, a kitchen/breakfast room, utility, living room and rear sun room (single storey) on the ground floor. The second floor comprises 4 bedrooms (one of which is to have an en-suite bathroom) and a bathroom set in the roof space. There are neighbouring two-storey residential properties to each side and also on the opposite side of South Street. The neighbouring dwelling to the east is set behind the building line of both the proposal and the other neighbouring property to the west. The site is set on sloping ground which is higher to the west than the east and in addition, the site is set at a higher level (approximately 1 m higher) than that of the neighbouring property to the east and the level of South Street at the front of the site. There are some deciduous trees alongside the boundary with Number 5 South Street. Extensive excavation of the site is intended so as to lower the overall height of the property so that, as is shown on the street scene drawing provided, the ridge height of the roof is consistent with the ridge heights of the neighbouring properties. A supporting statement accompanies the application and this includes computer generated 3 dimensional diagram/graphic to demonstrate the relationship of the proposal to the property to the east and also the effect of overshadowing with the sun at a 45 degrees angle. Fenestration has been carefully designed to be sympathetic to the design of the house and it features conservation roof lights. In addition, the non-roof light fenestration is restricted to obscure glazed bathroom windows to both side elevations on the first floor in order to prevent overlooking of neighbouring properties.

This is a re-submission of a previously withdrawn application (submitted in 2005) for a 5 bedroom house and it follows extensive negotiations carried out with officers in order to address the earlier concerns of neighbours. A complete re-design, re-positioning and lowering of the floor level of the proposal has been undertaken.

274100 2741001 A D The E Lilacs E N A (PH) 1 L 1 L IL M

e 3

a Isham 33 35 h 1

C Farm STREET

1 R 4 6 U 2

CH 2 2

1 0 2

25 3

2 5

3 1 S

0 O 43 U T T 5 S 0 39 H LE D S Pear Tree Cott ID T 740 M 740

Pear Tree Cott 6 8 All Saints 25 House

1 J u 19 b i 3 P le 8 e 7 A 1 T R T E e 3

6 E 1 K r a r ( R a T C c S e 15

E 2 L LB L O 1 D

1 ID 3 S

M E 7

4 5 9 6 7 ET

2 RE

Grey ST

2 1 Gables H 8 3 UT

739 SO 739

8 Tithe Barn

1 8 1

1 A

2 1 N

C The Brambles

6 6 1

E 3 Allerton House

rack 273800 T A 273800

488600 887 488800 Scale 1:1250 51 The application is referred to Committee for decision due to the number of objections that have been received.

PLANNING HISTORY: BW/79/0468/O Outline planning permission granted for one dwelling and garage. WP/2002/0132/O Outline planning permission for single storey dwelling. WP/2005/399/RM Detached 2 storey dwelling and garage - withdrawn.

PLANNING POLICY: Northamptonshire Structure Plan Policies: GS2, GS5, H3 and AR6. Borough of Wellingborough Local Plan Policies: G1, G4, G12, H1, H2 and H12.

CONSULTATIONS: 1. Environmental Health Officer – further to the submitted ‘Environmental Risk Assessment’ as the site is on the Northampton sand strata it may contain elevated levels of naturally occurring arsenic. A condition should be included in any approval requiring that a further ‘Environmental Risk Assessment’ to address this factor be carried out.

2. County Highway Authority – recommends the insertion of a condition in respect of the vehicular access.

3. Conservation Officer – the proposal will not have a detrimental impact upon the character and appearance of the village Conservation Area. Conditions required in respect of windows and door details as well as materials.

4. Third Parties – written representations have been received from 5 local residents raising objections on the grounds of: (i) Planning permission was previously granted for a bungalow; (ii) the building appears higher than the adjacent property; (iii) trees will be removed to build so spoiling the view; (iv) an extra very wide vehicular access should not be permitted as it will create a hazard; (v) building is too large and will lead to over-development of the site; (vi) loss of value of existing properties. (vii) overlooking of properties opposite and invasion of privacy from such a tall building; (viii) site is contaminated with arsenic; (ix) it will be overbearing and located very close to no. 5 also leading to a substantial loss of light, especially on 30% of the entire garden; (x) overlooking from proposal to side windows of no. 5; and, (xii) Insufficient garden area remains (a footprint of approximately 240 sq metres on a site of 350 sq metres).

ASSESSMENT: The principle of the development of this site has been established by the grant of outline planning permission for a single storey dwelling. Accordingly the main issues to be considered on the determination of this application are: i) Design and impact of the proposal and its impact upon the character of the area. (ii) Impact upon the amenities of the adjoining occupiers. (iii) Garden area. (iv) Responding to the points made by the objectors and the comments made in other representations.

APPRAISAL: (i) he design of the proposal is entirely sympathetic to the character of the surrounding Conservation Area. A view that is shared by the Borough Council’s Conservation Officer 52 (ii) Given the form, size and scale of the proposal there will be some impact upon the amenities of adjoining residential occupiers. The proposal has been subject to detailed negotiations and redesign to minimise this impact since the withdrawal of the previous application. The property that will be most affected is no. 5 South Street. The revised siting of the proposal and the reduction in floor level, together with a part of the footprint being single storey and rooms being placed in the roof area (which is not all of the same height and is hipped to reduce the overshadowing effect on no. 5) ensure that there is no direct overlooking and the loss of light is within acceptable limits in planning terms. (iii) The garden area that remains will be compact but as such it is not out of character with some other properties in the Conservation area that are equally close-knit in terms of juxtaposition and layout. (iv) Some of the points made above respond to aspects raised by the objectors. The remaining points are now responded to as follows. Whilst the property does have rooms in the roof space, the ridge height of the latter is not set at a higher level than the ridges of the neighbouring properties and there are no windows at first floor level to the sides that are not obscure glazed, save for roof lights (so no overlooking can occur). The property if single storey would be entirely out of keeping with both neighbouring properties to the side and those opposite and to the rear. Although close to the boundary, the one and a half storey (rooms in the roof space) nature of the proposal means that the height is clearly not excessive. In terms of its bulk the property is not out of keeping with the character and appearance of the village Conservation Area. A condition can be imposed as requested by the County Highway Authority and the Environmental Health Officer. The former’s comments and requirements address the road safety issue. The latter’s comments deal satisfactorily with the possibility that arsenic may be present on the site (if it is found on this site it is highly likely to be present also on the neighbouring sites given that its likelihood of being present is a feature of the local geology). Loss of property value and loss of a view are not material planning considerations. There is a sufficient distance in respect of overlooking to the property’s opposite which are already faced by the neighbouring two-storey properties.

CONCLUSIONS: There are not any valid reasons or material planning considerations why planning permission should not be granted.

RECOMMENDATION: Approve.

1. The development shall be begun not later than the expiration of three years beginning with the date of this permission. 2. Representative samples of all external facing and roofing materials shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority before the development is commenced. 3. The single point of access must be defined and visibility over a height of 0.6m achieved within splays of 2.4m by 2.4m on each side. Development shall not be commenced until this detail has been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. 4. To prevent loose material being deposited onto the public highway at least the first 5m of the drive from the highway boundary must be hard-paved. 5. Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995 (or as amended) no garages, sheds or 53 other buildings shall be erected without express planning permission from the local planning authority, other than those expressly authorised by this permission. 6. Full details and design specification of the windows, doors and rainwater goods shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority before development commences. 7. The stone dressing shall be traditional coursed crop rubble limestone. 8. A further Environmental Risk Assessment shall be carried out before the development commences to investigate whether there is naturally occurring arsenic on the site and the remediation works necessary to address this if found. 9. A scheme for screen fencing/walling shall be agreed with the local planning authority before the start of construction. The agreed scheme shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the local planning authority before the houses are occupied. 10. The site shall be landscaped and planted with trees and shrubs in accordance with a comprehensive scheme which shall be submitted to and approved by the local planning authority before the development is commenced. The scheme shall be implemented concurrently with the development and shall be completed not later than the first planting season following the substantial completion of the development. Any trees and shrubs removed, dying, being severely damaged or becoming seriously diseased within five years of planting shall be replaced by trees and shrubs of similar size and species to those originally required to be planted or other species as may be agreed.

Reasons: 1. Required to be imposed pursuant to S51 of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004. 2. In the interests of amenity. 3. In the interests of highway safety. 4. In the interests of highway safety. 5. In the interests of amenity. 6. In the interests of the character and appearance of the village Conservation Area. 7. In the interests of the character and appearance of the village Conservation Area. 8. In the interests of public health and safety. 9. In the interests of amenity and privacy. 10. In the interests of visual amenity.

INFORMATIVE/S 1. Pursuant to Section 38 (6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004, the proposed development complies with the applicable development plan policies and there are no other material considerations that would constitute sustainable grounds for refusal. These include specifically the following policies: GS2, GS5, H3 and AR6 of the Northamptonshire County Structure Plan and G1, G4, G12, H1, H2 and H12 of the Borough of Wellingborough Local Plan. 2. The applicant is advised that this decision relates to the following drawing numbers received on the date shown: Drawing Number: Date Received: 3853 - 10; MS-2056 06/04/2006 3. The applicant is advised that planning permission does not automatically allow the construction of the vehicle crossing, details of which require the approval of the Highway Authority. In this regard you should contact the Team Leader 54 Regulations, Sustainable Transport, Riverside House, Riverside Way, Northampton NN1 5NX prior to any construction/excavation works within the public highway. 4. In undertaking the development hereby permitted the provisions of the Party Wall Act 1996 shall be fully upheld.

BOROUGH COUNCIL OF WELLINGBOROUGH AGENDA ITEM

Regulatory Committee 21/06/2006

Report of the Executive Director

APPLICATION REF: WP/2006/0176/F

PROPOSAL: Extension to Industrial Unit.

LOCATION: Krohne Limited, Rutherford Drive, Park Farm Industrial Estate, Wellingborough.

APPLICANT: Mr Andrew Howard, Krohne Limited.

This application is brought before the Committee because the advice is that, if it is approved, it should be subject to a Section 106 agreement.

PROPOSAL AND DESCRIPTION OF SITE: Large extension to an existing property on the Park Farm Industrial Estate.

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY: Located within the area covered by the former Park Farm Simplified Planning Zone.

NATIONAL AND LOCAL PLANNING POLICY: G1, G2, E1, E7 and UE1 of the Borough of Wellingborough Local Plan and Alteration.

SUMMARY OF REPLIES TO CONSULTATIONS/REPRESENTATIONS RECEIVED: 1. County Highway Authority – recommends that the highway standards and planning conditions set out in the document ‘Minor Planning Applications that have an effect on the highway’ be applied to this planning application.

2. Environment Agency – no objections subject to various informatives to be passed on to the applicants.

3. Central Networks (Electricity) - no objections subject to various informatives to be passed on to the applicants.

4. Borough of Wellingborough, Cultural Development Manager – requests a Section 106 contribution of 1% of the development expenditure towards a piece of public art for a prominent place on the Park Farm Industrial Estate.

5. Campaign for the Dark Skies – has suggested a condition to be imposed on any permission to control light pollution.

6. Third parties – one letter of objection received from the proposed occupiers of an office unit to the rear that is currently under construction. This expresses concern about the impact of the new building on their proposed offices on the Gas Gov

861862 863 3 267900 267900 R Y El Sub Sta L E D R IV E

Gas Gov

Park Farm Industrial Estate 1

Tk 2 Dencora Business Park El Sub E Sta IV R D H T ESS O O B

678 678 7

3 9

| (

R U T H E R F O R

4 D 3 R IV E

| (

677 ( | D 677 ( SE

| O CL Y LE UX

4 5

D El Sub Sta

(

El Sub Sta D

E S O L C IS L L A W 676 676

( Y |

( |

E S O L C El Sub Sta R E I P A N Pond

675 675

E S

| O L ( C

R E I P

N Y Park Farm Industrial Estate

Mast D ( D ( Mast

Pond

( D

D Y 674 Y 674

CDH

ED a V nd Ward Bdy

267300 267300

486000 861 862 863 486400 R Y Scale 1:2500 H

Cromwell Spinney D 56 following grounds: It is felt that the closest elevation to them is of poor design and appears to be being treated as the back of the site rather than as an elevation facing onto Huxley Close. There is no scope for a landscape buffer between the car parking and the highway on the side of the site facing their premises. It is suggested that the car parking should be relocated on the site to give scope for this. The development proposes two roller shutter doors facing the proposed office block including a door to a pump room which will only be 9 metres from their premises. These should be relocated further away. It is noted that there is a water tank proposed for the rear of the site which has little architectural merit. As a minimum this should be coated to blend in with the main building. Finally, there is little reference to landscaping especially along the site’s southern boundaries.

ASSESSMENT: This is an application for a rear extension to the Krohne Building and associated works.

The proposal is located in the Park Farm Industrial Estate on land previously designated as part of the town’s Simplified Planning Zone (SPZ). The SPZ identified this location as being suitable for use in accordance with Classes B1, B2 and B8 of the Town and Country Planning Use Classes Order in principle. This proposal comprises a mixture of uses in the form of industry and warehousing plus associated parking and manoeuvring space for vehicles. It will be achieved by developing land which is currently a mixture of grass and parking provision and providing extra parking to compensate for that lost.

Policies G1, G2, E1 and E7 of the Local Plan plus Policy UE1 of the Local Plan Alteration accept developments of this nature providing the proposal does not have an adverse effect on the surroundings and is of an acceptable design.

Car parking and highways issues

The proposal involves an increase in the footprint of the existing building from 3660m2 to 5360m2. Some existing parking will be lost. In total, 112 car parking spaces are to be retained and proposed. Based on the mixture of B1, B2 and B8 uses on the site as a whole and the required parking (as defined in the Countywide parking SPG) for each of these types of use, 105 car parking spaces are needed on site. There is therefore a surplus of 7 spaces. The proposal is therefore acceptable in terms of parking provision.

Policy E7 of the Local Plan indicates that proposals for large scale warehousing and distribution will only be permitted on industrial estates with satisfactory access to the primary road network. The site is well located for access to both the A509 and A45. It is therefore acceptable in this respect.

Flooding issues.

Policy G2 of the Local Plan seeks to ensure that new development does not cause flooding problems. Related to this, the proposed building is of a size whereby the related drainage system could receive a significant increase in surface water run off as a result. The proposal has been discussed with the Environment Agency and they advise they have no objections subject to a number of informatives being passed on to the applicant’s. This information has been passed on as required in order that it can be taken into account when the site is developed.

57 Design and impact on the surroundings.

The proposal involves an extension to what is already a very large building. It will, however, be only slightly higher than this structure. In design terms, the proposal is considered acceptable. It is also considered to be an acceptable distance away from nearby premises including the office block that the objectors are referring to. As a result, it is not considered justified to relocate any of the proposed doors away from the objector’s premises.

The existing building is extremely visible from the surroundings and the extension will add to this impact. However, this impact is not considered to be sufficient to justify refusing this application because there are also a number of other large buildings nearby and the proposal will be seen as part of these. Notwithstanding this, it is important that sufficient landscaping is carried out to mitigate against the effect of the proposal as much as possible. There is considered to be scope for this along the central part of the boundary of the site facing the objector’s premises and this can be secured by means of a planning condition. There is therefore no need to relocate any car parking to allow for more space for this.

The colours and materials used in the building (including the external tank referred to by the objectors) can be controlled by planning condition.

Policy UE1 of the Local Plan Alteration adds in a number of other topics to consider including the need for satisfactory on-site manoeuvring and loading arrangements, access to public transport and cycle facilities, the need to prevent crime and promote personal security plus the need to conserve energy, avoid amenity loss through light pollution and ensure sustainable drainage.

The proposal makes adequate manoeuvring and loading arrangements for the new extension.

The town’s cycle network extends in close proximity to the site and the company has made provision for cycle parking. Park Farm is also served by public transport.

In terms of the issues relating to crime, the proposal is within an existing site and will not increase the risk in this respect compared to the existing situation.

Any Building Regulations approval that is granted in relation to this matter will address the need to conserve energy and any problems relating to light pollution can be controlled by planning condition. The condition suggested by the Campaign for Dark Skies can be imposed to ensure satisfactory lighting arrangements.

The informatives suggested by Central Networks have been passed on to the applicant’s agent in order that they can be taken into account when the site is developed.

The proposal is therefore considered acceptable in relation to these aspects of Policy UE1.

Policy UE1 also states proposals with significant transport implications should be supported by transport assessments and travel plans. Neither of these has been provided with the application. The Highway Authority has, however, considered the proposal and does not object.

58 Section 106 contributions

Finally, the proposal is of a size whereby possible Section 106 contributions have to be considered. Consultations have been carried out with all the identified ‘responsible officers’ for possible contributions and, at the time of writing this report, one request has been received from the Council’s Cultural Development Manager. This reads: ‘I suggest that a Percent for Art contribution, (1% of the development expenditure), be requested in accordance with the Public Art Supplementary Planning Document adopted on 26 July 2005. The Borough Council recognises the contribution that public art has in the creation of a high quality built environment and would look for a contribution towards a piece of public art for a prominent place on the Park Farm Industrial Estate’.

A similar request was received in relation to an adjacent proposal in Huxley Close. In that case, no evidence was provided to justify this request in relation to the tests set out in circular 1/97, i.e. was the request necessary to make a proposal acceptable in planning terms, relevant to planning, directly related to the proposed development, fairly and reasonably related to the scale and kind to the proposed development and reasonable in all other respects? On this basis, the request was not considered reasonable.

However, that particular proposal related to a site which was expected to come forward when the industrial state was planned. It can therefore be argued that the infrastructure and surroundings were designed to accept the level of development proposed in that case.

This latest application is different in that it involves the intensification of operations on an existing site. This was not expected when the estate was planned. The request for a public art contribution is therefore seen as reasonable as part of mitigating against the effects of this extra development on the surroundings.

Conclusion

Subject to the applicant being willing to enter into a Section 106 agreement to secure a public art contribution, the application should be approved subject to conditions.

RECOMMENDATION: The issue of planning permission be delegated to the Proper Officer subject to the prior signing of a Section 106 agreement to secure a public art contribution and subject to the following conditions:

1. The development shall be begun not later than the expiration of three years beginning with the date of this permission. 2. The extension shall be used only for purposes within Classes B1, B2 and B8 of the schedule to the Town and Country Planning (Use Classes) Order 2005 or any provision equivalent to that Class in any Statutory Instrument revoking or re- enacting that Order. 3. Provision shall be made for the parking, turning, loading and unloading of vehicles within the site in accordance with the submitted plans. The areas so provided shall be laid out and surfaced to the satisfaction of the local planning authority before the premises are occupied and shall be permanently set aside and reserved for the purpose.

59 4. Details of all proposed external facing materials including those for window frames, doors, external tanks and drainage pipes shall be submitted to and approved by the local planning authority prior to the commencement of construction work on site. 5. The site shall be landscaped and planted with trees and shrubs in accordance with a comprehensive scheme which shall be submitted to and approved by the local planning authority before the development is commenced. The scheme shall be implemented concurrently with the development and shall be completed not later than the first planting season following the substantial completion of the development. Any trees and shrubs removed, dying, being severely damaged or becoming seriously diseased within five years of planting shall be replaced by trees and shrubs of similar size and species to those originally required to be planted or other species as may be agreed. 6. All exterior lighting shall be designed and fitted so that no light shines above horizontal into the night sky or causes a nuisance to neighbouring properties.

Reasons: 1. Required to be imposed pursuant to S51 of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004. 2. In the interests of amenity and to ensure that effective planning control is retained by the local planning authority. 3. To ensure that adequate parking facilities are maintained. 4. In the interests of visual amenity. 5. In the interests of visual amenity. 6. In the interests of amenity.

INFORMATIVE/S 1. Pursuant to Section 38(6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004, the proposed development complies with the applicable development plan policies and there are no other material considerations that would constitute sustainable grounds for refusal. These include specifically the following policies: G1, G2, E1, E7 and UE1 of the Borough of Wellingborough Local Plan. 2. This permission relates to the plans with references 124-P-02, 124-P-03 and 124-P-04 all received at the local planning authority on 5th April 2006. 3. Vehicular accesses into the site must be constructed in accordance with the specification of Northamptonshire County Council. Any works should be agreed with the Area Maintenance Engineer, Highways Depot, Harborough Road, Brixworth, Northamptonshire, NN6 9BX. All highway surfaces over the frontage of the site must be made good to the approval of Northamptonshire County Council. 60

BOROUGH COUNCIL OF WELLINGBOROUGH AGENDA ITEM

Regulatory Committee 21/06/2006

Report of the Executive Director

APPLICATION REF: WP/2006/0184/F

PROPOSAL: Revised position of side wall to approved application WP/2005/0213/F.

LOCATION: 62 Main Street, Little Harrowden, Wellingborough.

APPLICANT: Mr M Fisher.

This application is to be heard by the Regulatory Committee due to an objection by Little Harrowden Parish Council.

PROPOSAL AND DESCRIPTION OF SITE: A two storey semi-detached cottage, with its surrounding curtilage, located within the village confines of Little Harrowden forms the application site. No. 60 Main Street adjoins the site to the south west. Chapel Lane runs adjacent to the north eastern site boundary.

This proposal is a resubmission of application reference WP/2005/0231/F under which planning permission was granted for a first floor extension on 11th May 2005. This application seeks a revision to the position of the side wall of the extension.

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY: WP/2005/0213/F Increased floor area to existing approved first floor extension (resubmission – WP/2002/0348/F) – approved with conditions.

As detailed above this application is a resubmission of this previously approved proposal.

NATIONAL AND LOCAL PLANNING POLICY: G1 of the Borough of Wellingborough Local Plan.

SUMMARY OF REPLIES TO CONSULTATIONS/REPRESENTATIONS RECEIVED: 1. Little Harrowden Parish Council – objects to the application and supports the neighbouring properties in their comments.

2. Public Rights of Way Officer, Northamptonshire County Council - there is a Public Right of Way Footpath TK 6 registered on the Definitive Map (2005) adjacent to the development site. The following points should be taken into account.

5 13

P E r im a

r y 125

9 c 7 8 h 11 o o l 5 11 Grave Yard

Club B 9 0

S 92.0m 8

8 9 C 6 H 5 O 10 O 78 L B

7 7

0 L 4 717 9 A 717 4 School House .5 N 6 E m 1

6 @ 4

( 7

8 9

's 6 ary 2 C

5 St M H

ch 6 hur 0 A C T P E E E L R L A T A L S N 3 91.4m E B 9 IN IO A B M 3

NC M

2 O anor 4 4

4 U 8 R

T C

1 our 4

6 t 1 Hall

85 3 83

7 716 716 4

90.2m 4

Manor House The Ten O'Clock (PH)

5 ILL VIEW

271500 271500

487100 872 487300 H Scale 1:1250 61 • The route must be kept clear, unobstructed, safe for users, and no structures or material placed on the right of way. • There must be no interference or damage to the surface of the right of way as a result of the development. • Any damage to the surface of the path must be made good by the applicant, specifications for any repair or surfacing work must be approved by this office.

3. Third Party – objection from the adjoining occupier of April Cottage (60 Main Street). Objects on the grounds of loss of light. The extension is moving closer to this neighbouring property and will reduce light to the first floor bedroom. The wall which will be built on is an ancient dividing wall, is not load-bearing and could become unsafe if built on. The wall forms part of the adjoining single storey extension at April Cottage and it were to prove unable to bear the weight when built upon it would result in damage to the property.

ASSESSMENT: Residential Amenity This application seeks permission to revise the position of the side wall of the first floor extension granted permission under the previous application. The wall will project approximately 0.3 metres closer to the adjoining property. In terms of loss of light the proposal appears to comply with the 45° angle test detailed in Supplementary Planning Guidance (SPG) II: Residential Extensions with regard the nearest ground floor window in the rear elevation of the adjoining dwelling. There will therefore be no significant loss of light to the adjoining dwellinghouse. The velux window proposed in the roof slope of the side elevation facing toward April Cottage was approved under the previous application. It is considered that this will permit light to this space but will not give rise to overlooking and loss of privacy. Overall it is considered that the repositioning of the wall will not have a detrimental effect on the amenities currently enjoyed by the occupiers of the adjoining property or any other neighbouring property.

Proposal Design It is considered that the proposal will enhance the design of the rear elevation of the property. There is no reason to refuse this application on design grounds.

Other Considerations The concerns regarding the construction of the extension and the capacity of the wall to sustain this development are appreciated. However this will be dealt with under Building Regulations and is not considered to be a material planning consideration in the determination of this application.

Summary It is considered that the proposal is in accordance with G1 of the Borough of Wellingborough Local Plan and there are no other material planning considerations that constitute sustainable reason for refusal.

RECOMMENDATION: Approve with conditions:

1. The development shall be begun not later than the expiration of three years beginning with the date of this permission. 2. The external walls and roof of the extension shall be constructed with materials of the same type, texture and colour as the external walls and roof of the existing building. 62 3. Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995, or any order revoking and re-enacting that order, no additional windows or other openings shall be installed in the side elevation at first floor level of the extension hereby permitted that will face No. 60 Main Street (April Cottage) without the express prior written consent of the local planning authority.

Reasons: 1. Required to be imposed pursuant to S51 of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004. 2. In the interests of amenity. 3. To safeguard the privacy of the adjoining property.

INFORMATIVE/S 1. Pursuant to Section 38 (6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004, the proposed development complies regional guidance and with the applicable development plan policies and there are no other material considerations that would constitute sustainable grounds for refusal. These include specifically Regional Spatial Strategy 8 and the following policy: G1 of the Borough of Wellingborough Local Plan. 2. The applicant is advised that this decision relates to the following drawing number received on the date shown: Drawing Number: Date Received: Location Plan 857/06/5 28/03/2006 3. There is a Public Right of Way Footpath TK 6 registered on the Definitive Map (2005) adjacent to the development site. The following points should be taken into account. i) The route must be kept clear, unobstructed, safe for users, and no structures or material placed on the right of way. ii) There must be no interference or damage to the surface of the right of way as a result of the development. iii) Any damage to the surface of the path must be made good by the applicant, specifications for any repair or surfacing work must be approved by this office.

BOROUGH COUNCIL OF WELLINGBOROUGH AGENDA ITEM

Regulatory Committee 21/06/2006

Report of the Executive Director

APPLICATION REF: WP/2006/0191/O

PROPOSAL: Redevelopment of site to form 12 no. residential apartments (outline application).

LOCATION: 96 Northampton Road, Wellingborough.

APPLICANT: Mr Andrew Howard.

PROPOSAL AND DESCRIPTION OF SITE: Outline application for 12 apartments. No reserved matters are included for consideration although illustrative plans for a 2½ storey scheme have been placed.

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY: None relevant.

NATIONAL AND LOCAL PLANNING POLICY: Borough of Wellingborough Local Plan Policies G1, UH5, G22, G25 and H1. County Structure Plan Policy GS5 SPG’s, V - Parking and VIII - Building Better Places.

SUMMARY OF REPLIES TO CONSULTATIONS/REPRESENTATIONS RECEIVED: 1. NCC Highways –

“The driveway must be widened to 4.5m for the first 10m from the highway boundary.

The existing vehicular crossing must be suitably widened and reconstructed in accordance with the specification of Northamptonshire County Council

Pedestrian to vehicle visibility above a height of 0.6m must be provided and maintained within splays of 2m x 2m on both sides of the point of access.

To prevent loose material being carried onto the public highway at least the first 5m of the driveway from the highway boundary is to be hard-paved.

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

The applicant should be advised to discuss refused collection aspects of the proposal with the appropriate officer of the Borough Council of Wellingborough.”

6 0 1

3 3 7

6 1 Borough Council Of Wellingborough: Licence No.100018694. Published 07/06/2006 9

881

4 9

26760046 267600

4 4

0 5

40 7 82 5

9 7

30 7 2 8a Nursing Home

7 1 B 78.6m 20 E V I R B D M 7 7.8 W 72.5m 9m E 1 ( Y AV 0 TCB

E ER B

5 L 1 S R

K ( O 8

BM 73.37m ( @ A

A D 74.7m @ 2 O

B 2 1 2 6 1

E a

IV 1

R 1 72.5m D Shelter Y E B L K

A 4 3 8 O

675 675

1 7

P 8

Y 5 1 T a C

L 5 E 1 Y

8 R

1 IS E 0 Y 9 E

L H 6

5 E 1 T Y IS

P R 2

9 1

1 4

B 73.2m

1 3

1 D

A 1 O

1 R N O 3 8 y T 9 d P B M rd a A H W R T C R Garage O

674 N 674 6

2 5

1 6 H

6 A

9 R 7 3 V

7 1

34a

8 4 1 1 B 1 71.6m

8 1 1

5 4

5 1 a

69.8m 8 36

7 B

8 267300 9 267300 1 5

488000 881 488200 6

Scale 1:1250 Charles Robinson Court

9 7

5 to

8 7 7

E 46 S O L C N G R 64 2. WBC Policy –

“The proposal is for small flats in an area which is predominantly large detached or semi-detached properties in mature gardens. Whilst the footprint of the proposed building is not too dissimilar to existing properties the parking facilities will change the character of the plot.

In particular you should consider whether the proposal meets the following policy criteria:

G1 (1): The development is of a high standard of design which respects and enhances the characteristics of its surroundings.

UH5 (2): The need to create pleasing environments with a range of dwelling types and sizes in layouts that respect and enhance the building characteristics and landscape settings of the locality.

GS5: In order to promote high quality design and sustainable development, all proposals will have regard to the visual appearance of the development in the context of the defining characteristics of the local area …”

3. Third Parties – objections received on grounds of noise, disturbance, traffic dangers, loss of amenity, destruction of environment, poor design (excessive height) loss of excellent dwelling and precedent for destruction of character of entire vicinity.

ASSESSMENT: Applicant comments as follows in respect of jurisdiction for approval of scheme and view of it relative to policies:-

“The application site, 96 Northampton Road, extends to approximately 0.27 acres and contains a single 3 bed house that was constructed mid-30’s. The site is the penultimate of a row of 6 no. properties that are similar in so much as they are of the same period, style and on large plots albeit of individual design. These properties are not typical of Northampton Road comprising, predominantly, substantial semi-detached houses. If anything, the six properties appear out of place in an area that has subsequently been built around with high density estates (Oakley Drive and Pytchley Rise in particular). These properties are more suited to the Hatton Park area however, the small number, in this location, are viewed by many as being opulent, therefore offensive and inappropriate, and thus a target of anti-social behaviour. Their day is passed; this view is reinforced by the fact that the expansive gardens of some have already been sold-off for housing plots. These houses are no longer sustainable in this community and, in keeping with the spirit of Local Plan Policy H5, the proposal is for small dwelling units which have regard for the efficient use of the land, local need and market demand and can meet the needs of single people, small families and the elderly and disabled.

Relevant Local Plan Policies would appear to be G1, G10, H1, H5, H8, H15, UH5.

The application contains illustrative details of a possible development layout indicating siting, mobility units, access, parking provision, amenity space, bins storage facilities, cycle parks, etc. Due to the fact that a request for pre- 65 application discussions was refused back in February, the details have not been refined by objective comment or input from the Council’s planning officers nor from other interested representatives. However, as a yardstick, in respect of Local Plan Policy G1, a precedence has been set by the recent granting of Planning Permission on the former Texaco petrol filling station site located directly opposite this application site, across the Northampton Road. Given the proximity of the Texaco petrol filling station site to the application site, planning policies and the primary planning considerations would be equally relevant to both sites. The Planning Officer who considered the application for the Texaco petrol filling station site came to the conclusion that the proposed redevelopment fitted all the relevant criteria and his view was subsequently endorsed, overwhelmingly, by the Planning Inspectorate.

The comparison between the two sites is valid as they are both Previously Development Land in similar settings separated by the common access road (Northampton Road). The fact that the filling station site may have been contaminated which would require remediation prior to having a residential use has little or no bearing upon the form of re-development as it would still need to satisfy the relevant Local Plan policies, especially G1. The cost of remediation necessary to render the land suitable for residential use is reflected in the purchase price and not its developed value, in the case of the filling station, Texaco sold the site for the sum of £150,000 (source = Land Registry), well below the going rate for land with development potential. Incidentally, the site was subsequently sold-on with the benefit of Planning Permission for an undisclosed sum believed to be in excess of £450,000 (the going rate?).

The national planning policy guidance advice is to concentrate new development within existing settlements whenever this is possible and to re-use existing sites. High density schemes are now a requirements of central government policy H6 of the County Structure Plan requires all new developments in the County to achieve a net minimum density of 35 dwellings per hectare.

The application is for Outline Consent to redevelopment 96 Northampton Road and includes illustrative details of how the redevelopment could be completed sympathetically to the requirements of the Local Plan.

1. Density The application for the re-development of the Texaco petrol filling station site was, initially, for a flat development comprising 8 no. 1 bed and 5 no. 2 bed flats with 1 no. commercial unit on a site having a plan area of 0.14 ha. – a density of approximately 100 units/ha (assuming the commercial unit equates to a 1 bed flat). This application is for 10 no. 1 bed and 2 no. 2 bed flats on a site having a plan area of 0.11 ha. In line with national planning guidance.

2. Parking Parking provision is based upon 1 no. space per dwelling in line with the current Supplementary Planning Guidance. It is however acknowledged that a lower provision may be preferred due to the proximity of the town centre and primary bus routes.

3. Noise The proximity of car parking to adjacent houses is less than 7m on the filling station site compared with over 8m on the illustrative layout with plenty of scope 66 for adjustment. Also relevant is the filling station site is higher than the properties to the rear of the site by some 1.5m, with parked cars on a level with bedrooms, whereas the situation is reversed in this case where the properties to the rear of the site are over a metre higher with a boundary defined by established hedging. There is plenty of scope on the site for alternative parking layouts and locations that can be explored in a Full Planning Application.

4. Setting The filling station re-development is set less than 3.5m from the gable of the existing adjacent (domestic) property. The illustrative layout for this application has the minimum dimension over 3.5m with scope for increase if the gap both sides of the building were to be balanced to adjacent buildings.

5. Appearance As with the filling station, the proposal is, to quote the Planning Officer, in effect two-storey with the addition of rooms in the roof space. It is, therefore, similar in height to the existing adjacent properties. The design of the proposal would minimise any problems of overlooking of habitable rooms of neighbouring properties. The treatment of the elevations shown on the illustrations is fairly plain and functional to be sympathetic to the surroundings with symmetry and interest being provided by incorporating hip-ends, gables and dormer windows to the roofs.

6. Traffic In terms of traffic generation, for the filling station, it was stated that the residential use would have much less adverse impact than movements associated with the commercial use of the site. The traffic generation from this site would still be less than the potential of the filling station even when combined with their new development. The 2 no. access/egress to the former filling station site have been reduced to 1 no. and that is no longer opposite the access to this site thus reducing the conflict in vehicle movements that pre-existed.

7. Security This is only an Outline application and aspects of Security of both the proposed development and the adjacent properties would be addressed within a Full Planning Application. It is worth noting, however, that the rear boundary of the site is currently defined with a 2.4m high close boarded fence, in good repair, and established dense hedging. The two side boundaries are defined by 1.8m high fencing, also in good repair.

I believe that the above demonstrates that the proposal would have no adverse effects on the living conditions of occupiers of surrounding dwellings by reason of loss of privacy, light or outlook, or of noise and disturbance, and that it would not be in conflict with Local Plan Policies G1 of UH5. The Planning Inspectorate, when considering the Appeal for the petrol filling station site, stated that it is the Governments’ view that developments providing numerous small units are in increasing demand and that different types of housing or tenures do not necessarily make bad neighbours. This is an Outline application and finer points of concern can be addressed at the Full Planning application stage and by having regard to the advice in Circular 11/95 – ‘Use of Conditions in Planning Permissions’.

67 The applicant makes close comparison between site and the filling station site opposite. The character of the two sides of the road is, however, considered to differ. The filling station site has commercial premises near to it and smaller dwellings.

The applicant notes national guidance and the need to concentrate new development in existing settlements at minimum density of 35/hectare. Regard must be had, however, to policies.

Policy G1(1) is as follows:

POLICY G1

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

1. IS OF A HIGH STANDARD OF DESIGN WHICH RESPECTS AND ENHANCES THE CHARACTER OF ITS SURROUNDINGS.

It is considered that the proposal is contrary to G1. Although the drawings submitted are illustrative only the 12 units are specified and would have to require a design of similar proportions to achieve the number.

Policy UH5 is as follows:

POLICY UH5

PLANNING PERMISSION WILL BE GRANTED FOR RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT WITHIN THE TOWN, AS DEFINED ON THE PROPOSALS MAP, PROVIDED THAT PROPOSALS SATISFY:

1. THE NEED TO USE LAND EFFICIENTLY AND SECURE A NET MINIMUM DENSITY ON HOUSING SITES OF 35 DWELLINGS PER HECTARE; 2. THE NEED TO CREATE PLEASING ENVIRONMENTS WITH A RANGE OF DWELLING TYPES AND SIZES, IN LAYOUTS THAT RESPECT AND ENHANCE THE BUILDING CHARACTERISTICS AND LANDSCAPE SETTINGS OF THE LOCALITY. 3. THE NEED FOR SAFE HIGHWAY NETWORKS WITH ADEQUATE PROVISION FOR PUBLIC TRANSPORT, CYCLING AND PEDESTRIAN MOVEMENT; 4. THE NEED TO PREVENT CRIME AND PROMOTE PERSONAL SECURITY; 5. THE NEED TO AVOID UNNEIGHBOURLY STANDARDS OF AMENITY IN DESIGN AND LAYOUT; 6. THE NEED FOR ENERGY AND WATER CONSERVATION, EFFECTIVE WASTE MANAGEMENT, SUSTAINABLE DRAINAGE SYSTEMS AND THE AVOIDANCE OF FLOODING; 7. THE NEED TO PROVIDE ASSOCIATED CAR PARKING IN ACCORDANCE WITH CURRENTLY OPERATIVE STANDARDS; AND 8. THE NEED TO INTEGRATE DEVELOPMENT WITH EXISTING SETTLEMENT PATTERNS AND PROVIDE CONVENIENT ACCESS TO SOCIAL FACILITIES.

It is considered that the proposal cannot be consistent with part 2 of this policy, given the environment in which the application site is located.

68 The Local Plan contains a general presumption in favour of residential development in residential areas as defined on the Proposals Map (H1).

PPS1, however, indicates that design which is inappropriate in its context or which fails to take the opportunities available for improving the character and quality of an area should not be accepted. In addition, Policies G1 and UH5 of the Local Plan refer to the need for development to be of a high standard of design that respects and enhances the character of its surroundings. In addition, Policy GS5 of the County Structure Plan refers to the need for proposals to have regard to the visual appearance of the development in the context of the defining characteristics of the local area.

The existing dwelling is one of several large detached properties located on the northwest side of this part of Northampton Road. These dwellings are set in mature gardens that make an important contribution to the character and appearance of the area. The current proposal would result in the loss, in part, of the existing garden area and available landscaping (particularly to the front of the dwelling) and therefore fails to respect and enhance the character of the area. This character could be further eroded by the cumulative impact of other proposals similar to that now under consideration which could emerge in the future and may prove difficult to resist in the event that planning permission is granted for the flats. I would further suggest that the actual dwellings, although not listed, do have a certain character which reflects the age in which they were built and is worth conserving.

RECOMMENDATION: Refuse.

1. The proposal is considered to be an inappropriate form of development inconsistent with the character of the area. It is considered to be contrary to Policies G1(1) and UH5(2) of the Borough of Wellingborough Local Plan.

POLICY G1

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

1. IS OF A HIGH STANDARD OF DESIGN WHICH RESPECTS AND ENHANCES THE CHARACTER OF ITS SURROUNDINGS.

POLICY UH5

PLANNING PERMISSION WILL BE GRANTED FOR RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT WITHIN THE TOWN, AS DEFINED ON THE PROPOSALS MAP, PROVIDED THAT PROPOSALS SATISFY:

2. THE NEED TO CREATE PLEASING ENVIRONMENTS WITH A RANGE OF DWELLING TYPES AND SIZES, IN LAYOUTS THAT RESPECT AND ENHANCE THE BUILDING CHARACTERISTICS AND LANDSCAPE SETTINGS OF THE LOCALITY. 69

BOROUGH COUNCIL OF WELLINGBOROUGH AGENDA ITEM

Regulatory Committee 21/06/2006

Report of the Executive Director

APPLICATION REF: WP/2006/0231/O

PROPOSAL: Outline application for residential development.

LOCATION: Land adjacent to 16 Cromer Road, Finedon, Wellingborough.

APPLICANT: Borough Council of Wellingborough.

This application is referred to the Regulatory Committee for determination because the Borough Council of Wellingborough is the applicant.

PROPOSAL AND DESCRIPTION OF SITE: As described.

The application site is a vacant area of flat land in Cromer Road that is surrounded by residential properties of no clear architectural style with modern dwellings evident to the northwest and on the opposite side of the road and older dwellings being located to the southeast. Growing inside the site on the southwestern and northwestern boundaries are rows of mature conifers and there are also conifers in the rear garden of no. 26.

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY: WP/97/0232/O Site for erection of 9 detached dwellings – conditionally approved. WP/2001/0491/O The erection of 3 dwellings – conditionally approved.

NATIONAL AND LOCAL PLANNING POLICY: Regional Spatial Strategy 8 Northamptonshire County Structure Plan - GS5, H3 and H6 Borough of Wellingborough Local Plan – G1, G4, H2 and H12 Supplementary Planning Guidance – Parking, Planning Out Crime and Building Better Places Planning Policy Statement 1; Delivering Sustainable Development Planning Policy Guidance 3; Housing Planning Policy Guidance 13; Transport Planning Policy Statement 7; Sustainable Development in Rural Areas

SUMMARY OF REPLIES TO CONSULTATIONS/REPRESENTATIONS RECEIVED: 1. NCC Highways – recommends that access, turning and parking details form part of the any reserved matters application.

2. Finedon Parish Council – no comment received at time of writing the report.

7 6 B 7

72 9

4 C

1 oac

1 2 4 6 h 7 9 E B ui

H 918 n p

a 7 d o l 3 L rt 1 l P Wentworth C e s 271900 S 271900 e is u O 1 Farm n u m tr r m U M e e e r le N a e n M D s e e w 9 s 5 P 0 8 l

8 a

8 c L 3 di N 7 9 e re 6 M t

E en

8 C 5 b m A S ta 1 S U M

2 2 l 9

0 89 1 ria 1 E o R 1 em L 1 M 1 ar E

W @ E

( 6

1 PO R 0

4 2 1 O B M A ( D 8 0

TCB .2

1 2

0 0

3 m 2 Club 1 Works 3

718 1 718 0

109 5

El Sub Sta 0 2 4

8 1 M 5 1 I 7 L 1 N 1 7 5 a E 1

9 1 R

9 2 a 3 2 R 1 O

2 3 34

2 A

4 3 1 a D

5 2 36 5 a C a

6 2 36

a R 7

O 38 1 M

2 0 7 R 9 4 2 9 a 3 R 1

OA 3

la 6 D 4 5 3 717 3 717 3

9 8 4

28 4 1 4 7 1 1 3 to 7 5 2 7 1 3 3 9 4 5 6 9 E 6 W 1 8

10 E

8 N 3 F

5 6 3 E 5 L 2 D 5

4 R

1 O 9 A D 68

1 3

6 35 4

3 4

271600 271600

491700 491900

918 7

6 9 6

Scale 1:1250 0

5 0 70 3. Environmental Protection Service – advises that a further Environmental Risk Assessment should be submitted to address the issue of the Northamptonshire sand strata that that underlies the site and which may contain elevated levels of naturally occurring arsenic.

4. Neighbours – no comment received.

ASSESSMENT: The material planning considerations are: • Compliance with policy • Effect on the visual amenity of the area • Effect on neighbours amenities • Crime and disorder

Compliance with policy Finedon is designated in the local plan as a limited development village. It is considered that the principle of new dwellings that are to be located within the built up area of the village and on brownfield land is entirely consistent with elements of national guidance, regional and development plan policy that seeks to direct new residential development in the rural areas to such sites.

Effect on visual amenity It is considered that the effect on the visual amenity of the street scene can be adequately assessed at the approval of reserved matters stage.

Effect on neighbours’ amenities It is considered that the effect on neighbour’s amenities can be adequately assessed at the approval of reserved matters stage.

Crime and disorder There are considered the development of a vacant piece of land that abuts residential boundaries could have a positive effect on crime and disorder by denying access to garden fences.

RECOMMENDATION: Grant outline planning permission with conditions.

1. Application for approval of reserved matters must be made not later than the expiration of three years beginning with the date of this permission and the development must be begun not later than whichever is the later of the following dates: (a) the expiration of five years from the date of this permission; or (b) the expiration of two years from the final approval of the reserved matters or, in the case of approval on different dates, the final approval of the last such matter to be approved. 2. Before any development is commenced, detailed plans, drawings and particulars of the siting, design and external appearance of the proposed development and the means of access thereto, together with screen walls/fences shall be submitted to and approved by the local planning authority and the development shall be carried out in accordance therewith. 3. In conjunction with condition no. 2 above the reserved matters shall include details of the finished floor levels of the dwellings in relation to the ground levels of the existing site. 71 4. Before development commences an Environmental Risk Assessment shall be submitted to the local planning authority that investigates the potential of naturally occurring arsenic being present on/under the site. Should naturally occurring arsenic be identified the Environmental Risk Assessment shall detail measures to remediate the risk to domestic habitation. The identified remediation measures shall be agreed by the local planning authority in writing and the works shall be carried out to the satisfaction of the local planning authority before the hereby approved dwellings are first occupied.

Reasons: 1. Required to be imposed pursuant to Section 92 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990. 2. To secure satisfactorily planned development. 3. In order to protect the amenities of the occupiers of the adjacent dwellings. 4. To protect the occupiers of the site from the effects of potential contamination.

INFORMATIVE/S 1. Pursuant to Section 38 (6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004, the proposed development complies with the applicable development plan policies and there are no other material considerations that would constitute sustainable grounds for refusal. These include specifically the following policies: Regional Spatial Strategy 8 Northamptonshire County Structure Plan - GS5, H3 and H6 Borough of Wellingborough Local Plan - G1, G4, H2 and H12 Supplementary Planning Guidance - Parking, Planning Out Crime and Building Better Places Planning Policy Statement 1; Delivering Sustainable Development Planning Policy Guidance 3; Housing Planning Policy Guidance 13; Transport Planning Policy Statement 7; Sustainable Development in Rural Areas 2. The applicant is advised that this decision relates to the following drawing numbers received on the date shown: 2nd May 2006 3. The applicant is advised that planning permission does not automatically allow the construction of the vehicle crossing, details of which require the approval of the Highway Authority. In this regard you should contact the Team Leader Regulations, Sustainable Transport, Riverside House, Riverside Way, Northampton NN1 5NX prior to any construction/excavation works within the public highway. 72

BOROUGH COUNCIL OF WELLINGBOROUGH AGENDA ITEM

Regulatory Committee 21/06/2006

Report of the Executive Director

APPLICATION REF: WP/2006/0235/F

PROPOSAL: Remodelling, refurbishment and extensions.

LOCATION: Sheltered Accommodation, Perkins Court, Bell Street, Wellingborough.

APPLICANT: Borough Council of Wellingborough.

This application is to be heard by the Regulatory Committee due to the applicant being the Borough Council of Wellingborough.

PROPOSAL AND DESCRIPTION OF SITE: The site is an existing block of sheltered accommodation within Wellingborough. Residential properties surround the site.

This application seeks permission for remodelling, refurbishment and extensions. The existing 14 bed-sit units will be converted and extended to form 11 one bed flats. A single storey and a two storey extension are proposed as part of the application.

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY: It is considered that there is no planning history relevant to the determination of this planning application.

NATIONAL AND LOCAL PLANNING POLICY: G1 of the Borough of Wellingborough Local Plan.

SUMMARY OF REPLIES TO CONSULTATIONS/REPRESENTATIONS RECEIVED: No representations received at the time of writing this report.

ASSESSMENT: Residential Amenity The proposed two storey extension will face towards no. 64 and no. 66 Great Park Street which are located to the west of the site. Currently there are approximately 15 metres between the existing unit to be extended and the properties which front Great Park Street. This distance will reduce to approximately 13 metres with the extension. It is considered that any loss of light caused by the positioning of the extension will be minimal. There is one window proposed at first floor level in the rear elevation of the proposed two storey extension which will face towards no. 64 and no. 66 Great Park Street. It is considered that due to there being existing windows in the rear elevation of the sheltered accommodation unit the level of privacy currently enjoyed by the

1 5 2 2 2 2

1 4 D PC H

Borough Council Of Wellingborough: Licence No.100018694. Published 07/06/2006 D

3 1 894 9 0 1 6 F

E G 268500 R 268500 I S R 6 1

2 E B 5

7 U 2 S 4 2 1 0 T R

O 2 N a Lister N E 8 a E House 2 R

B 8 O 1 E A

R D D A O 39 L A D E D A R 2 O O 25 R

A 3

1 D N 13

0 7 0 D 3 11 1 ( LB E N

3 I

5 1 6 F A AD

V R RO

E TE

S 4 LI 2 N U

E 3 0

R 1 2

O 1 1

1 A 8 y R

Bd D C d r a

4 ED

5 1

2 1 14 2

s e 129

2 684 684 115

1 7 to 10 EET

103 TR S 1 0 RK 8 6 AT PA 7 E R 3

1 1 G

4 Factory 9 6 BAK B76.2m ER STR

4 EET

2 1 8

4 4 2 1

1 1 W orks

0 8 1 2 6 6 to 7 1 m 6 . 5 5 7 0 BE Bell Court to 52 LL 5

S 8 3 B

R t

0 EE o

T 6

7 2

2 to 3

8 Pe 1 a rki 73.6m 1 ns C to 3 ourt

2 7

m 8 8 0 G 3 4 B O 5 1 RDO .

3 T RO 7 6 N

A E 4 D E R T

S 7 2

Be 3 @ R ll Cou

A rt 6

L 5

P 4

O 5

0 P 6

1 6 9 5 5 7 o t 683 683 4 52b 5

73 6 a 9

52 4

a 3

3 o

7 5

1 3

5 6 1 0 2 3

17 2 3 4 b B 71.5m o 17 t T a HO 7 M 3 A Bell Court S ST REE 15 ( P T ost

T 2 EE 3 LITT STR LE PARK 3

6 2 61a

Car Park Sunnyville

8 2

T Car Park 6 3 E m o E t

B Park 9 R P 1

A 1 T R t

KC Tavern o

S R 1

ES (PH) 8 C N EN T O 71.4m N

B 7

2 2 0 N o t

LB A 2 2 2 C (

1 T 6 R E E GE Depot E N T S 1 T 2 RE 67.7m TR ET

S 2 Wellingborough Park 2 B

1 K 5 Junior School 1 R

8 268200 2 268200 P

T 489300 489500

A 894

4 E 3 WB

R y

6 d

4 3

G B R

5 Scale 1:12503 0 C 2 rd PCs a

b W 9 1 &

a D 9

E 1

BM 66.92m 1 9 @ 4 1

a (

8 7

1 1

8 73 properties of Great Park Street and specifically no. 64 and no. 66 will not be sufficiently affected by the proposal to warrant a recommendation for refusal.

A single storey extension is also proposed. This extension will infill between two walls of the existing building and is not positioned in close proximity to the site boundary. No neighbouring properties will be detrimentally affected by this proposed extension.

Other alterations within the confines of the site include some minor elevational design changes, remodelling of the garden with repositioning of items within this area, and new hard and soft landscaping features. It is considered that these will enhance the existing site area and will be in accordance with the provisions of Policy G1 of the local plan.

Proposal Design The design of the proposed extensions and alterations will be in keeping with the existing building and will not adversely affect the character of the surrounding residential area.

Other Considerations It is considered that the proposal is in accordance with Policy G1 of the Borough of Wellingborough Local Plan and there are no other material planning considerations that constitute sustainable reason for refusal.

RECOMMENDATION: Approve with conditions.

Reasons: 1. Required to be imposed pursuant to S51 of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004. 2. In the interests of amenity.

INFORMATIVE/S 1. Pursuant to Section 38 (6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004, the proposed development complies with regional guidance and the applicable development plan policies and there are no other material considerations that would constitute sustainable grounds for refusal. These include specifically Regional Spatial Strategy 8 and the following policy: G1 of the Borough of Wellingborough Local Plan. 2. The applicant is advised that this decision relates to the following drawing numbers received on the date shown: Drawing Number: Date Received: Location Plan 4100/10 Rev A 4100/11 Rev A 4100/12 Rev A 4100/13 Rev A 12/04/2006

BOROUGH COUNCIL OF WELLINGBOROUGH AGENDA ITEM

Regulatory Committee 21/06/2006

Report of the Executive Director

APPLICATION REF: WP/2006/0240/O

PROPOSAL: Outline application for residential development.

LOCATION: 107 Land adjacent Valley Road, Wellingborough.

APPLICANT: Borough Council of Wellingborough.

This application is referred to the Regulatory Committee for determination because the Borough Council of Wellingborough is the applicant.

PROPOSAL AND DESCRIPTION OF SITE: As described.

The site is currently a vacant corner plot that has recently been cleared and planted with grass. The houses nearby were originally developed as social housing and are exclusively semi-detached. At the rear of the site is a watercourse with embankments and the Doddington Road beyond. The most affected property is no. 107 Valley Road which is adjacent to the north and has some planting on its boundary.

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY: None recorded.

NATION AND LOCAL PLANNING POLICY: Regional Spatial Strategy 8. Northamptonshire County Structure Plan - GS5 and H6. Borough of Wellingborough Local Plan – G1, G2, H1, UH1 and UH5. Supplementary Planning Guidance – Parking, Building Better Places and Planning Out Crime. Planning Policy Statement 1; Delivering Sustainable Development. Planning Policy Guidance 3; Housing. Planning Policy Guidance 13; Transport. Planning Policy Statement 23; Planning and Pollution Control.

SUMMARY OF REPLIES TO CONSULTATIONS/REPRESENTATIONS RECEIVED: 1. NCC Highways – has no objection but makes specification comments.

2. Environment Agency – no comments.

3. Neighbours – letters of objection have been received from the occupiers of 84 and 88 Valley Road who cite the following reasons for opposing the scheme:

6 4 D 2 8 V SE A O CL L E L K

6 A

Borough CouncilO Of Wellingborough: Licence No.100018694. Published 07/06/2006

8 1

1 4 D 889 5 B 266300 D 58.5m 3 266300 7

D 4

Y D 11 15

O 0

D 6 D D I

G Y OHN LEA WA T J

1 N 8

1 4

D R

A 1 2

3 D

1 7 3 16

D 4

662 D 662

2 2 2

A 28

N D

K 36

0 S

1 8 P 0 E 30 7 NC ER R OA

2 D 5

8 3

5 4

60.0m

0 BM 58.61m

@ 4 2

(

1 5

7 2 2

3 9

661 661

1 1 6

155 4

Y NE

m 5 L

1 8 L

5 I 0 M LS EL RN

0 4 1

4 3 1

Allotment Gardens Y Y

266000 RK 266000 PA 488800 S 489000 889 ER

ILL M 0 Scale 1:1250 5 75 • Concern that the outline application does not show any detail with regards to siting, height, design and exterior facing materials and third parties may not object because of the lack of detail in the application. • Loss of light. • Loss of privacy. • Development would result in a loss of amenity because children currently play on the site. • Car parking congestion. • Belief that the site would never be built on because of the number of services which lie underneath it and reference to an application for a Scout Hut which was refused for this reason.

ASSESSMENT: The material planning considerations are: • Compliance with policy • Effect on neighbours amenities • Effect on visual amenity • Parking • Crime and disorder

Compliance with policy The proposal site is situated within the built up area of a town and it carries the H1 policy designation on the local plan proposals map. The scheme is therefore considered to be in accord with elements of Government guidance and other development plan policies that direct new housing development to sites within urban areas.

Effect on neighbours’ amenities The comments from neighbours are noted and it is accepted that the scheme will affect the standard of amenities that are currently enjoyed by the occupiers of the neighbouring dwellings to a certain degree. It is considered however that the effects of a residential scheme on the existing amenity of the nearby occupiers can be adequately assessed and regulated at the approval of reserved matters stage to ensure that any effects are not overly harmful.

Effect on visual amenity The effect on the visual amenity of the street scene can again be adequately assessed at the approval of reserved matters stage.

Crime and disorder It is considered that there are no relevant crime and disorder issues relating to this application.

CONCLUSION: Approve subject to conditions.

RECOMMENDATION: Grant outline planning permission with conditions.

INFORMATIVE/S 1. Pursuant to Section 38 (6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004, the proposed development complies with the applicable development plan policies and there are no other material considerations that would constitute sustainable grounds for refusal. These include specifically the following policies: Regional Spatial Strategy 8 Northamptonshire County Structure Plan - GS5 and H6 Borough of Wellingborough Local Plan - G1, G2, H1, UH1 and UH5 Supplementary Planning Guidance - Parking, Building Better Places and Planning Out Crime Planning Policy Statement 1; Delivering Sustainable Development Planning Policy Guidance 3; Housing Planning Policy Guidance 13; Transport Planning Policy Statement 23; Planning and Pollution Control. 2. The applicant is advised that this decision relates to the following drawing numbers received on the dates shown: 18th April 2006 3. The applicant is advised that planning permission does not automatically allow the construction of the vehicle crossing, details of which require the approval of the Highway Authority. In this regard you should contact the Team Leader Regulations, Sustainable Transport, Riverside House, Riverside Way, Northampton NN1 5NX prior to any construction/excavation works within the public highway. 77

BOROUGH COUNCIL OF WELLINGBOROUGH AGENDA ITEM

FOR INFORMATION

Regulatory Committee 21/06/2006

Report of the Executive Director

APPLICATION REF: WP/2005/0584/C

PROPOSAL: Construction of the A509 Isham Bypass. To include associated roundabout junctions and side roads.

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

APPLICANT: Northamptonshire County Council.

NOTE: Approved by Northamptonshire County Council on 5th May 2006 subject to the following condition/s:-

Time Limit

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

Scope of Permission

2. Except as otherwise required by conditions attached to this planning permission the development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the submitted application i.e. Planning Support Statement; Flood Risk Assessment (dated January 2005), indicative landscape plan Figure 16 and Drawing No’s, 51 C, 66 A Sheet 1, 66 A sheet 2, 28 B, 59 A, 60 A, 61 A, 62 A, 68 A, 69 A, 70 A and 72A,

Landscaping

3. The bypass shall be landscaped and planted with hedgerows, trees and shrubs in accordance with a comprehensive scheme which shall be submitted no later than twelve months from the date of this permission for approval in writing by the County Planning Authority. The scheme as approved shall be implemented concurrently with the development and shall be completed no later than the first planting season following the substantial completion of the development, or as may otherwise be agreed. Any hedgerow plants, trees of shrubs removed, dying, being seriously damaged or becoming seriously diseased within five years of planting shall be replaced by trees and shrubs of similar size and species to those originally required to be planted, or such other species as may be agreed.

78 Materials

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

Lighting

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

Hours of Working

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

Geotechnical Survey

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

Construction Traffic

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

9. Prior to the commencement of construction works, all temporary accesses to be used by construction traffic and any temporary accommodating works to be provided, shall be submitted to the County Planning Authority for approval in writing.

Machinery Noise Suppression

10. Except as may otherwise be agreed in writing by the County Planning Authority, all plant, equipment and machinery used on site for the road construction, including vehicular traffic to and from the site, shall be designed and maintained to reduce noise levels to a minimum and shall be operated in accordance with manufacturer’s instructions. All plant, equipment and machinery used on site, including vehicular traffic, which is capable of being fitted with the appropriate silencers, baffles, cladding and rubber linings shall be so fitted and maintained.

79 Wheel Cleaning

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

Dust

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

Vehicle Sheeting

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

Archaeology

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 which has been submitted by the applicant and approved by the County Planning Authority.

Protected Species

15. Prior to the commencement of any construction work, further surveys shall be undertaken in respect of any bat activity, the presence of great crested newts and the location of badger setts. The results of the surveys, together with appropriate mitigation strategies shall be submitted to and approved by the County Planning Authority in writing and thereafter implemented and maintained in accordance with the approved details.

Drainage

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

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

Public Rights of Way

18. Details of the design, construction and materials of all public rights of way overbridges and underpasses for the bypass shall be submitted to the County Planning Authority for approval in writing prior the their construction. The approved details shall then be implemented. 80

Breeding Birds

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

Noise Mitigation

20. Except as may otherwise be agreed in writing by the County Planning Authority, prior to the commencement of the development a scheme of hard and soft landscaping proposals to assist with the noise mitigation measures near to properties in Winston Close shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by the County Planning Authority. The approved scheme shall be implemented prior to the new road first coming into use.

Reasons for conditions and relevant Development Plan Policies

1. Required to be imposed pursuant to Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.

2. To define the scope of the permission and in the interest of clarity.

3. In the interest of visual and residential amenity (Borough of Wellingborough Local Plan Policy G22 and Kettering Borough Local Plan Policy 6).

4. In the interest of residential amenity (Borough of Wellingborough Local Plan Policy E9 and Kettering Borough Local Plan Policy 12).

5. In the interest of residential amenity (Borough of Wellingborough Local Plan Policy E9 and Kettering Borough Local Plan Policy 12).

6. To ensure that working on site is carried out within reasonable hours so as to avoid disturbance to nearby residential properties (Borough of Wellingborough Local Plan Policy E9 and Kettering Borough Local Plan Policy 12).

7. In the interest of residential amenity (Borough of Wellingborough Local Plan Policy E9 and Kettering Borough Local Plan Policy 12).

8. In the interest of amenity and highway safety (County Structure Plan Policies T3 and T5).

9. In the interest of amenity and highway safety (County Structure Plan Policies T3 and T5).

10. To minimise noise disturbance to local residents (Borough of Wellingborough Local Plan Policy E9 and Kettering Borough Local Plan Policy 12).

11. In the interest of highway safety and to prevent mud and dust getting onto the highway (County Structure Plan Policies T3 and T5).

81 12. To safeguard the local environment and protect the amenities of local residents from unreasonable dust levels (Borough of Wellingborough Local Plan Policy E9 and Kettering Borough Local Plan Policy 12).

13. To safeguard the interest of users of the public highway (County Structure Plan Policies T3 and T5).

14. To safeguard the archaeological interests of the site and enable adequate opportunities for archaeological investigations (County Structure Plan Policy AR6 and Kettering Borough Local Plan Policy 25).

15. To safeguard Protected Species (County Structure Plan Policy AR3).

16. To reduce the risk of flooding (County Structure Plan, Policy AR8).

17. To reduce the risk of flooding (County Structure Plan, Policy AR8).

18. In the interest of vehicular and pedestrian safety and visual amenity (County Structure Plan Policies T3 and T5).

19. To protect breeding birds (County Structure Plan Policies AR3 and AR5).

20. In the interest of residential amenity (Borough of Wellingborough Local Plan Policy E9 and Kettering Borough Local Plan Policy 12).

REASONS FOR APPROVAL

The proposed development is considered to be acceptable having regard to Northamptonshire County Structure Plan 2001: Policies T3, T4, T5, T8, AR1, AR2, AR3, AR5, AR6, AR7, AR8 and AR9, Borough of Wellingborough Local Plan 1999: Policies G6, G20, G21, G22, E9, T1 and A1 and Kettering Local Plan 1997: Policies 6, 7, 11, 12, 16, 18, 25, 26 and 78.

The environmental and amenity impacts of the proposed development have been considered against the appropriate Development Plan Policies, and although there will be some detriment to neighbouring residents, the mitigation measures proposed are considered to appropriately minimize their impact. It is deemed that a number of planning conditions can be imposed which will sufficiently protect the natural environment and amenity of local residents.

BOROUGH COUNCIL OF WELLINGBOROUGH AGENDA ITEM

FOR INFORMATION

Regulatory Committee 21/06/2006

Report of the Executive Director

APPLICATION REF: WP/2006/0102/C

PROPOSAL: Erection of a 2 storey 6 classroom extension and new school hall, artificial multi use games area and additional car parking.

LOCATION: Victoria Infant School, Finedon Road, Wellingborough.

APPLICANT: Northamptonshire County Council.

NOTE: Approved by Northamptonshire County Council on 25th May 2006 subject to the following condition/s:-

1. The development hereby permitted shall be begun not later than the expiration of THREE YEARS from the date of this permission.

2. Except as otherwise required by condition attached to this planning permission the development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the submitted application, Planning Support Statement, transport appraisal and transport appraisal technical addendum dated April 2006 and Drawing Nos. SK01, Sk02, SK03, SK04 rev A, SK05 rev B, Sk06 rev B, Sk07 rev A.

3. Prior to the new school buildings coming into operation full details of all proposed highway works to include a right turn lane into the site off Finedon Road and amendments to show the revised location of the access gates within the site shall be submitted to and agreed in writing by the County Planning Authority, and fully implemented in accordance with the approved drawings.

4. All facing, fencing and roofing materials shall be those specified in the submitted planning application unless otherwise agreed in writing by the County Planning Authority. Details/samples and of the colour of these materials shall be submitted to and agreed in writing by the County Planning Authority prior to the commencement of any works to construct the building.

5. Prior to the occupation or use of the development hereby permitted, a School Travel Plan shall be reviewed and updated and submitted to the County Planning Authority for its approval. The scheme shall be based on appropriate survey work, assessment of the results of this work, consideration of options and shall result in the formation of an Action Plan, all of which shall be undertaken in regular consultation with the County Council’s Travel Plan Team. Upon approval, the reviewed School Travel Plan shall be fully implemented within 3 83 months and an annual monitoring report on its effectiveness shall be submitted to the County Planning Authority on the anniversary of such approval the conclusions and recommendations of which shall, within 3 months, be implemented in full.

Reasons for conditions and relevant Development Plan Policies

1. Required to be imposed pursuant to Section 92 of the Town and Country Planning Act as amended by the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004.

2. To define the scope of the permission and in the interest of clarity.

3. In the interest of Highway Safety (Northamptonshire County Structure Plan policy T3).

4. In the interest of visual amenity (Northamptonshire County Structure Plan policy GS5 and Borough of Wellingborough Local Plan policy G1).

5. To reduce the number of car borne journeys related to the development and to encourage the use of the means of transport other than the private car (Northamptonshire County Structure Plan 2001: Policy T8, Northamptonshire SPG: Parking 2003).

INFORMATIVE The applicant’s attention is drawn to the requirement for £10,000 to be available for sustainable transport initiatives and any required traffic orders/engineering works in the event of the Travel Plan failing to meet targets as stated within the document.

REASONS FOR APPROVAL

It is considered that the proposed development is acceptable and will not cause a detrimental effect to the area as a whole in terms of visual or residential amenity. The proposed development is considered to be sited at sufficient distance from the properties on Leys Road, the level of parking on the site is acceptable in line with the parking SPG and the development as a whole does not require an unacceptable amount of vegetation to be lost.

It is therefore considered that the proposed development is acceptable in accordance with Northamptonshire County Structure Plan policies GS5, T3, T6 and T9 and Borough of Wellingborough Local Plan policies G1 and T9 and that planning permission for the development be granted subject to conditions.

84 21st June 2006

REGULATORY COMMITTEE

The following applications dealt with under the terms of the Executive Director’s delegated powers.

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

WP/2006/0120/F Mr I Worboys 23 Church Way, Grendon, AC Wellingborough. Revised application. Two storey rear extension only.

WP/2006/0121/F Colin Wright 193 Hinwick Road, Wollaston, AC Wellingborough. Front extension for porch and cloakroom.

WP/2006/0137/F Mr M Shah 2 Irchester Post Office, AC Wollaston Road, Irchester, Wellingborough. Erection of 2.4 metre high boundary fencing.

WP/2006/0156/F Mr and Mrs D Venn 16 Prospect Avenue, AC Irchester, Wellingborough. First floor extension over existing single storey rear extension.

WP/2006/0159/F Mr P D Thompson, Borough Castlefields Park, AC Council of Wellingborough Irthlingborough Road, Wellingborough. Erection of fourteen 6 m high lighting columns, with son-t- 7ow lamps to give a level of illumination to category 3/2. Proposed to be erected at side of existing path (which is proposed to also be a cycleway).

WP/2006/0160/F Mr P Alcindor 151 Shelley Road, AC Wellingborough. Erect a PVCu conservatory to rear of property.

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

WP/2006/0161/F Mr P Thompson, Borough Bassetts Park, West Villa AC Council of Wellingborough Road, Wellingborough. Erection of nine 6m high lighting columns, with son-t- 7ow lamps to give a level of illumination to category 3/2. Proposed to be erected at side of existing path (which is proposed to also be a cycleway).

WP/2006/0163/F Mr J Waughton 22 Main Road, Wilby, AC Wellingborough. Two storey side extension.

WP/2006/0165/F Mr I Black and Mrs J Dunkley 4 Lyle Court, Wellingborough. AC Construction of glazed conservatory.

WP/2006/0178/F C L Rogers 23a Lower Street, Great AC Doddington, Wellingborough. Extension to rear, improvements to external insulation and cladding.

WP/2006/0179/F Mr M Joshi 25 Thomas Street, AC Wellingborough. Alterations to existing rear extension.

WP/2006/0180/F Garry West The Old Post Office, 55 High AC Street, Finedon. Wellingborough Single storey rear lean to kitchen extension.

WP/2006/0181/LB Garry West The Old Post Office, 55 High AC Street, Finedon. Wellingborough Proposed new lean to single storey extension to rear of property.

WP/2006/0182/F Vicki Coultham 143 Wellingborough Road, REFUSED Finedon, Wellingborough. Vehicular access.

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

WP/2006/0185/F Mr V Patel 36 Holcot Close, AC Wellingborough. First floor side extension, plus conversion of garage to games room.

WP/2006/0186/F Mr G Bell 148 Melton Road North, AC Wellingborough. Two storey rear extension - Revised scheme to approval WP/2005/0699/F.

WP/2006/0187/F Mrs J Tuckett 80 Wellingborough Road, AC Finedon, Wellingborough. Alterations to form new shop front and single storey rear extension.

WP/2006/0190/O Mr D Mallard Plot forming part of 3 AC Edinburgh Road, Wellingborough. Proposed building plot for single two storey detached dwelling, off road parking and private garden.

WP/2006/0193/LB Mr D Dicks Land off West Street, Ecton, AC Wellingborough. Conversion of barn to dwelling with detached garage.

WP/2006/0194/AV Public Information Pillars Public Information Pillar, AC Cannon Street, Wellingborough. Advertisements for the purpose of directing members of the public to, or otherwise drawing attention to the existence of, business premises which are in the same locality as the site on which the advertisement is to be displayed but which are not visible from that site.

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

WP/2006/0195/AV Public Information Pillars Public Information Pillar, AC Doddington Road, Wellingborough. Advertisements for the purpose of directing members of the public to, or otherwise drawing attention to the existence of, business premises which are in the same locality as the site on which the advertisement is to be displayed but which are not visible from that site.

WP/2006/0196/AV Public Information Pillars Public Information Pillar AC Market Street Wellingborough Advertisements for the purpose of directing members of the public to, or otherwise drawing attention to the existence of, business premises which are in the same locality as the site on which the advertisement is to be displayed but which are not visible from that site.

WP/2006/0197/AV Public Information Pillars Public Information Pillar, AC Sheep Street/Commercial Way, Wellingborough. Advertisements for the purpose of directing members of the public to, or otherwise drawing attention to the existence of, business premises which are in the same locality as the site on which the advertisement is to be displayed but which are not visible from that site. 88

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

WP/2006/0198/AV Public Information Pillars Public Information Pillar, AC Between Market Square and Orient Way, Wellingborough. Advertisements for the purpose of directing members of the public to, or otherwise drawing attention to the existence of, business premises which are in the same locality as the site on which the advertisement is to be displayed but which are not visible from that site.

WP/2006/0199/AV Public Information Pillars Public Information Pillar, AC Outside Public Library, Pebble Lane, Wellingborough. Advertisements for the purpose of directing members of the public to, or otherwise drawing attention to the existence of, business premises which are in the same locality as the site on which the advertisement is to be displayed but which are not visible from that site.

WP/2006/0200/AV Public Information Pillars Public Information Pillar, AC Church Street/Gloucester Place, Wellingborough. Advertisements for the purpose of directing members of the public to, or otherwise drawing attention to the existence of, business premises which are in the same locality as the site on which the advertisement is to be displayed but which are not visible from that site.

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

WP/2006/0201/AV Public Information Pillars Public Information Pillar, AC Outside no. 63 Oxford Street, Wellingborough. Advertisements for the purpose of directing members of the public to, or otherwise drawing attention to the existence of, business premises which are in the same locality as the site on which the advertisement is to be displayed but which are not visible from that site.

WP/2006/0202/AV Public Information Pillars Public Information Pillar, AC Midland Road, Wellingborough. Advertisements for the purpose of directing members of the public to, or otherwise drawing attention to the existence of, business premises which are in the same locality as the site on which the advertisement is to be displayed but which are not visible from that site.

WP/2006/0203/AV Public Information Pillars Public Information Pillar, AC Church Street/Orient Way, Wellingborough. Advertisements for the purpose of directing members of the public to, or otherwise drawing attention to the existence of, business premises which are in the same locality as the site on which the advertisement is to be displayed but which are not visible from that site.

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

WP/2006/0204/AV Public Information Pillars Public Information Pillar, AC Adjacent to Morrisons Car Park, Wellingborough. Advertisements for the purpose of directing members of the public to, or otherwise drawing attention to the existence of, business premises which are in the same locality as the site on which the advertisement is to be displayed but which are not visible from that site.

WP/2006/0205/AV Public Information Pillars Public Information Pillar, AC Outside no. 37 Market Street, Wellingborough. Advertisements for the purpose of directing members of the public to, or otherwise drawing attention to the existence of, business premises which are in the same locality as the site on which the advertisement is to be displayed but which are not visible from that site.

WP/2006/0206/F Mr Hale 33 Bradshaw Way, Irchester, AC Wellingborough. Loft conversion including dormer to rear.

WP/2006/0207/F Mr A and Mrs W Worsfold 32 Adams Close, AC Wellingborough. Garage extension.

WP/2006/0208/F Mr and Mrs J Morgan 54 York Road, Wollaston, AC Wellingborough. Single storey rear kitchen extension and internal alterations.

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

WP/2006/0211/F Mr F Pagliuca 14 The Pyghtle, AC Wellingborough. Demolition of existing single storey garage and erection of new single storey brick garage.

WP/2006/0212/F Mr Harish Tailor 28 Cambridge Street, APPROVED Wellingborough. Change of use from A1 to office and estate agents A2.

WP/2006/0213/F Mr and Mrs D Gardner 28 Windermere Drive, AC Wellingborough. Two storey side extension and rear conservatory.

WP/2006/0216/AG J E G James Newlands Farm, Harrold APPROVED Road, Bozeat, Wellingborough. Dutch barn for hay and straw storage.

WP/2006/0217/LB Mr D Marriott 51 The Old Rectory, Church AC Lane, Sywell, Wellingborough. Conservatory.

WP/2006/0219/F Alfred Underwood Limited Unit 1, The Yard, High Street, APPROVED Wollaston, Wellingborough. Change of use from workshop/storage to coffee/gift shop (A1, A3).

WP/2006/0220/LB M H Grant 35 West Street, Earls Barton, AC Wellingborough. Removal of internal plasterboard to loft/master bedroom, cutting of hole and fitting of a roof window (from Cast Rooflight Company) insulation of roof space and then refitting/renewal of plasterboarding.

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

WP/2006/0221/LB Harrowden Farms Limited Harrowden Farms Limited, AC Wentworth Farm, 2 The Slips, Great Harrowden, Wellingborough. To provide no. 2 conservation lights to rear roof slopes of existing farm building now to be used as farm office.

WP/2006/0223/F Paul Murphy 21 Stonelea Road, Sywell, AC Wellingborough. Change of use to garden use of land at rear and side of property.

WP/2006/0224/F Mrs E Wells 39 The Ridge, Great AC Doddington, Wellingborough. Single storey rear kitchen/dining extension.

WP/2006/0227/RM Prologis Developments 1-11 Claudius Way and land APPROVED Limited adj. between Victoria Mills and Chester Farm, A45, Wellingborough. Proposed amendment to reserved matters approval WP/2005/0302/RM and WP/2006/0039/RM (reduction in building size).

WP/2006/0228/F Mr L R Coombe 1 Land adjacent St Marys APPROVED Paddock, Wellingborough. Erect railings and bollards around piece of land at entrance to estate off Knox Road.

WP/2006/0232/F Louise Brackenbury and Scott 66 Hatfield Close, AC Pentelow Wellingborough. Conservatory to rear + single storey side toilet extension.

WP/2006/0233/F Mr F Hilsdon 3 Manor Farm, Orlingbury AC Road, Great Harrowden, Wellingborough. Domestic garage for private cars within the curtilage of Manor Farm gardens.

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

WP/2006/0265/TC T Mobile (UK) Limited Water Tower, Wellingborough APPROVED Road, Earls Barton, Wellingborough. Installation of additional telecommunications apparatus.

BACKGROUND PAPERS

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

Borough Council of Wellingborough, Environment and Economy Department, Croyland Abbey, Tithe Barn Road, Wellingborough.

REGULATORY COMMITTEE APPLICATIONS DEALT WITH

APPLICATION DECISIONS BOROUGH OF WELLINGBOROUGH Date: 08/06/06

Application No. Name & Address Description FP/2006/0152/ Mr & Mrs A Lloyd 123 HIGH Extension and internal alterations STREET IRCHESTER APPROVED C WELLINGBOROUGH

DI/2006/0156/ MRS H MODHA 55 Disabled facilities grant to provide Westminster Road ground floor washing facilities APPROVED Wellingborough

FP/2006/0358/ A Mr S Malthouse 15 Heath Side extension Rise Wellingborough APPROVED C

DI/2006/0610/ Mr Morrison 71 The Drive Internal structural alterations and Wellingborough external access alterations APPROVED

FP/2006/0615/ A Mr M A Stafford & Miss V L First floor bedroom & bathroom Kent 3 Mills Close Earls extension and rear single storey APPROVED C Barton Northampton dining room extension

FP/2006/0678/ Jason Giles 7C Kettering New dwelling Road Isham APPROVED C 95

REGULATORY COMMITTEE APPLICATIONS DEALT WITH

APPLICATION DECISIONS BOROUGH OF WELLINGBOROUGH Date: 08/06/06

Application No. Name & Address Description FP/2006/0931/MA Grace Homes LtdWoolpack Residential development of 16 ST Barn St Andrews Lane dwellings APPROVED Cranford St Andrew

FP/2006/0932/ Woodway Properties Demolition of existing single storey Limited21 23 Mallard Close unit, New Extension & Canopy to APPROVED C Earls Barton Northampton existing building

FP/2006/0954/ Mr & Mrs Cockings 22 Ground floor extension to side of Townley Way Earls Barton dwelling APPROVED C Northampton

FP/2006/0968/ A Kiteow 6 Green Hill Proposed alterations into two Wembley Park Middx apartments APPROVED C

FP/2006/0972/ W M Morrison Proposed Petrol Filling Station Supermarkets PLCHilmore APPROVED C House Thornton Road Bradford

FP/2006/1054/ Wren SchoolLondon Road New pitched roof over existing flat Wellingborough to existing gymnasium APPROVED 96

REGULATORY COMMITTEE APPLICATIONS DEALT WITH

APPLICATION DECISIONS BOROUGH OF WELLINGBOROUGH Date: 08/06/06

Application No. Name & Address Description PS/2006/1067/ London Borough of Construction of ground floor BromleyBuilding Control, Civic extension refurbishment of existing APPROVED C Centre Stockwell Close flat construction of new flat Bromley

FP/2006/1070/ Richard Stephenson 6 Gipsy Two storey extension to side and Lane Irchester rear APPROVED Wellingborough

FP/2006/1079/ Ian Wilson 15 Oak View Two storey extension Wellingborough APPROVED C

BN/2006/1081/ Robert Speed 30 Whitworth To replace existing manhole/drain Road Wellingborough and pipe work to join under ACCEPTED neighbours garden path. To replace existing drains at rear of property from stackpipe outlet to drain/manhole, etc.

FP/2006/1129/ Co-Operative Group Remove existing automatic door Ltd487-499 Nottingham Road and entrance lobby and replace APPROVED Chaddesden with repositioned new automatic doors

BN/2006/1130/ Mrs E Edge The Grange1 Part 2 - storey, mainly singl storey Church Way Ecton part demoliton, refurbishment, ACCEPTED rebuild & new build to create annexe to the grange 97

REGULATORY COMMITTEE APPLICATIONS DEALT WITH

APPLICATION DECISIONS BOROUGH OF WELLINGBOROUGH Date: 08/06/06

Application No. Name & Address Description FP/2006/1131/ Mrs C Vercambre 39 Castle Single storey rear extension to form Street Wellingborough garden room and WC/Shower APPROVED C room.

FP/2006/1133/ Mr & Mrs G James 12 Third Single storey extensions to existing Avenue Wellingborough house. APPROVED

FP/2006/1136/ Mr S Lal 21/23 Midland Road First floor flat improvement and Wellingborough separate access. APPROVED

FP/2006/1137/ Mr Dennis Smith 13 Prospect Single storey extension to dwelling. Close Wollaston APPROVED Wellingborough

FP/2006/1149/ Mr & Mrs Gardner 28 Two storey side extension Windermere Drive REJECTED Wellingborough

FP/2006/1150/ Mr Edwards 15 Brickhill Single storey front extension. Road Wellingborough REJECTED 98

REGULATORY COMMITTEE APPLICATIONS DEALT WITH

APPLICATION DECISIONS BOROUGH OF WELLINGBOROUGH Date: 08/06/06

Application No. Name & Address Description FP/2006/1154/ Mrs Pamela Massingham 35c Tea room Irthlingborough Road Finedon REJECTED Wellingborough

FP/2006/1158/ Mr & Mrs D Chapman 11 Construction of garages Orlingbury Road Great APPROVED Harrowden Wellingborough

FP/2006/1159/ Mr M Dalby 51 Stanwell Way Single storey rear extension Wellingborough APPROVED

BN/2006/1172/ Mr & Mrs W Smith Park View Alteration and improvement works House Washbrook Lane to kitchen and store rooms. ACCEPTED Mears Ashby Wellingborough Renewal of foul drains and I/Chambers

BN/2006/1173/ Borough Council Of Replacement windows to main hall WellingboroughSwanspool ACCEPTED House Wellingborough

BN/2006/1199/ Mr S James Occupier117 Demolish and rebuild . General Main Street Little Harrowden refurb. ACCEPTED Wellingborough 99

REGULATORY COMMITTEE APPLICATIONS DEALT WITH

APPLICATION DECISIONS BOROUGH OF WELLINGBOROUGH Date: 08/06/06

Application No. Name & Address Description BN/2006/1201/ Louise Brackenbury Scott Proposed downstairs toilet Pentelow Occupier66 Hatfield ACCEPTED Close Wellingborough

BN/2006/1205/ Mr & Mrs Wheatman 107 Replace existing summer room roof Doddington Road Earls with new flat roof ACCEPTED Barton Northampton

FP/2006/1206/ Mrs G Trickett 144 Melton Single storey rear extension to Road North Wellingborough kitchen APPROVED

BN/2006/1340/ A Sadler Occupier71 The Installation of french doors Pyghtles Wollaston ACCEPTED Wellingborough

BN/2006/1367/ Robert Tampkins Occupier2 Installation of 2 x new windows Moreton Avenue matching existing. ACCEPTED Wellingborough

FP/2006/1412/ Harrowden Farms Ltd Conversion of existing loft space Wentworth Farm2 The Slips over store & garages to form farm APPROVED Great Harrowden office. Wellingborough 100

REGULATORY COMMITTEE APPLICATIONS DEALT WITH

APPLICATION DECISIONS BOROUGH OF WELLINGBOROUGH Date: 08/06/06

Application No. Name & Address Description PS/2006/1480/ Kettering Borough Replacement doors and screen to CouncilMunicipal Offices existing Nursery Block areas APPROVED Bowling Green Road Kettering

DM/2006/1483/ Augusta Developments76 Demolition of existing building High Street Stony Stratford ACCEPTED Milton Keynes

DI/2006/1530/ Mrs M Beetsom 35a Eastfield Level access shower Crescent Finedon ACCEPTED Wellingborough

PS/2006/1548/ Northampton Borough Extension CouncilBuilding Control APPROVED Division Cliftonville House, Bedford Road Northampton

BN/2006/2027/ Mr Shepard Occupier Extension OccupierThingdon Cottage ACCEPTED Stocks Hill Finedon Wellingborough

FP/2006/2176/ Mr & Mrs M King 5 Denby Extensions to existing house Dale Wellingborough APPROVED 101

REGULATORY COMMITTEE APPLICATIONS DEALT WITH

APPLICATION DECISIONS BOROUGH OF WELLINGBOROUGH Date: 08/06/06

Application No. Name & Address Description BN/2006/2179/ Mr & Mrs J.C. Howard 34 First floor extension and loft Northampton Road Earls conversion ACCEPTED Barton Northampton

FP/2006/2180/ Mr A Slack 2 Prospect First floor extension Avenue Irchester APPROVED C Wellingborough

WI/2006/2192/ Dr Warwick J Coulson 70 Replacement landing window Glenfield Drive Great ACCEPTED Doddington Wellingborough

PS/2006/2195/ Solihull Metropolitan Strip out and refurbishment CouncilPO Box 19 Council APPROVED House Solihull

PS/2006/2196/ Corby District Replacement of window and door CouncilBuilding Control assemblies to Block 'A' as Phase 2 APPROVED Deene House, New Post works Office Square Corby

DI/2006/2222/ Mr G Pebody Occupier66 New shower room Fulmar Lane Wellingborough ACCEPTED 102

REGULATORY COMMITTEE APPLICATIONS DEALT WITH

APPLICATION DECISIONS BOROUGH OF WELLINGBOROUGH Date: 08/06/06

Application No. Name & Address Description DI/2006/2223/ Mr A George Occupier63 New shower room Princess Way ACCEPTED Wellingborough

DI/2006/2224/ Mrs M Barry Occupier36 New shower room Milton Avenue ACCEPTED Wellingborough

DI/2006/2226/ OccupierCharnwood The New shower room Avenue Wellingborough ACCEPTED

DI/2006/2228/ Occupier108 Lea Way New shower room Wellingborough ACCEPTED

FP/2006/2259/ Mr & Mrs I Houghton 171 New dwelling Station Road Earls Barton APPROVED C Wellingborough

BN/2006/2309/ Mr B Tilley Occupier27 Garage conversion to residential Chequers Lane Grendon ACCEPTED Northampton 103

REGULATORY COMMITTEE APPLICATIONS DEALT WITH

APPLICATION DECISIONS BOROUGH OF WELLINGBOROUGH Date: 08/06/06

Application No. Name & Address Description FP/2006/2311/ Mr & Mrs Mcclymont Ground floor extension at rear of Occupier30 Doddington Road dwelling REJECTED Wellingborough

DI/2006/2316/ Mr R Dudley Occupier8 Form a level access shower room Chapel Hill Irchester and disabled ramp ACCEPTED Wellingborough

DI/2006/2317/ Mrs S Hawkes Occupier39 Form a level access shower room Cromer Road Finedon ACCEPTED Wellingborough

DI/2006/2318/ Mr & Mrs M Pandya Form a level access shower Occupier20 Sandpiper Lane ACCEPTED Wellingborough

DI/2006/2319/ Mrs R Roberts Occupier27 Form a level access shower room Grange Road ACCEPTED Wellingborough

BN/2006/2335/ Mr D Fisher Occupier48 Bungalow : Install a fixed staircase Cedar Way Wellingborough ACCEPTED 104

REGULATORY COMMITTEE APPLICATIONS DEALT WITH

APPLICATION DECISIONS BOROUGH OF WELLINGBOROUGH Date: 08/06/06

Application No. Name & Address Description WI/2006/2352/ Mr Norton Occupier38 Replacement patio door / Millers Park Wellingborough Replacement kitchen door. ACCEPTED

DI/2006/2355/ Mr D Hall 28 Priory Road Disabled level access shower Wellingborough ACCEPTED

BN/2006/2411/ Mrs B Tims 16 Glenfield 2 windows (in Pvcu) and brickwork Drive Great Doddington removal to fit Upvc French doors. ACCEPTED Wellingborough

RE/2006/2427/ Mr Mark Ekins 38 Stubbs New roof and some windows Close Wellingborough ACCEPTED

BN/2006/2429/ Mr & Mrs J White 78 Replacement of windows Fallowfield Wellingborough ACCEPTED

WI/2006/2430/ Ms Janet Beattie 22 Patio doors and windows Sandringham Close ACCEPTED Wellingborough 105

REGULATORY COMMITTEE APPLICATIONS DEALT WITH

APPLICATION DECISIONS BOROUGH OF WELLINGBOROUGH Date: 08/06/06

Application No. Name & Address Description BN/2006/2431/ Gladstone Wmc 103 Disabled toilet and access ramp. Gladstone Working Mens ACCEPTED Club Wellingborough Road Finedon Wellingborough

DI/2006/2432/ Mrs A Sharp 158 Priory Road Level Access Shower Wellingborough ACCEPTED

BN/2006/2434/ Mr Barry Walsh 200 Enlargement of opening in Sywell Lodge Holcot Lane basement wall ACCEPTED Sywell Northampton

BN/2006/2435/ Mr M Chapman 27 Regent Electrical installation (single storey) Street Finedon ACCEPTED Wellingborough

RE/2006/2438/ Mr R Simmons 11 Kings 2 Chimney breast removals, Velux Street Wellingborough window installation and downstairs REJECTED toilet.

WI/2006/2439/ Mr Michael Carrington 3 Windows and doors Church Lane Wilby ACCEPTED Wellingborough 106

REGULATORY COMMITTEE APPLICATIONS DEALT WITH

APPLICATION DECISIONS BOROUGH OF WELLINGBOROUGH Date: 08/06/06

Application No. Name & Address Description BN/2006/2445/ Mr Matthew Okey 19 Berry Garage & utility room Close Earls Barton ACCEPTED Northampton

BN/2006/2447/ Mr Russell Day 42 Gillitts Rear extension with flat roof Road Wellingborough partially replacing present ACCEPTED conservatory

BN/2006/2448/ Mr K.A Waite 1 Riverview Internal alterations Gardens Denford ACCEPTED

BN/2006/2449/ Mr A Ruparel 97 Bourton Front porch extension and Way Wellingborough conversion of garage into habitable ACCEPTED room.

WI/2006/2450/ Mr J Chisholm 5 Paddock Insert new window (reproduction of Lane Mears Ashby original cottage style) ACCEPTED Northampton

BN/2006/2451/ M Sheppard 8 Nene Close 2 Storey Extension Wellingborough ACCEPTED 107

REGULATORY COMMITTEE APPLICATIONS DEALT WITH

APPLICATION DECISIONS BOROUGH OF WELLINGBOROUGH Date: 08/06/06

Application No. Name & Address Description BN/2006/2458/ Ivor Jones 2 Reynolds Close Removal of wall in roof space and Wellingborough wall immediately below on landing. ACCEPTED

BN/2006/2459/ Miss J Harker 59 Holyoake Installation of new electrical circuits Road Wollaston into new extension ACCEPTED Wellingborough