January 2007 at 7.00 Pm Council Chamber, Swanspool House

Swanspool House Wellingborough BOROUGH COUNCIL OF NN8 1BP

WELLINGBOROUGH 19th December 2006

Regulatory Committee Wednesday 3rd January 2007 at 7.00 pm 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 6/12/2006

Ι 4. Applications for planning permission, building regulation approval etc.

Ι 5. Planning Appeal Decisions: (a) 5/7 Albert Road, Wellingborough;

(b) 33 Hatton Street, Wellingborough;

6. Any other items that the Chairman decides are urgent.

Ι Enclosed

Please note: Site Viewing Group for Tuesday 2nd January 2007 will be Councillors Dholakia, Morrall, Palmer and Waters.

Lyn Martin-Bennison Chief Executive

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

For further information contact Democratic Services on 01933 231511. Borough Council of Wellingborough Regulatory Committee Wednesday 3rd January 2007 at 7.00 pm Council Chamber, Swanspool House

INDEX

Page No. SITE VIEWING GROUP

WP/2006/0568/F - Manor Farm, Strixton. 1 WP/2006/0583/F - 5 Bradshaw Way, Irchester. 8 WP/2006/0643/F - 1 The Grange, Church Way, Ecton. 14 WP/2006/0649/LB - 1 The Grange, Church Way, Ecton. 18 WP/2006/0710/F - 32 Thrift Street, Wollaston 21

DISTRICT

WP/2006/0252/F - Tower Boot Co Limited, Wellingborough Road, Finedon. 25 WP/2006/0556/O - 31 Land at rear Station Road, Finedon. 34 WP/2006/0602/F - 51 Stanwell Way, Wellingborough. 40 WP/2006/0607/O - 67 Harvey Road, Wellingborough. 43 WP/2006/0630/F - Community Centre Site, Spencer Road, Wellingborough. 48 WP/2006/0637/RM - Land adjacent 107 Valley Road, Wellingborough. 53 WP/2006/0653/F - The Bungalow, 31 Furnace Lane, Little Harrowden. 58 WP/2006/0654/F - South Field, Knuston High Farm, Station Road, Irchester. 65 WP/2006/0688/F - 60 Overstone Road, Sywell. 69

FOR INFORMATION

WP/2006/00596/C - All Saints Church of England Primary School, Castle Street, Wellingborough. 74

BOROUGH COUNCIL OF WELLINGBOROUGH AGENDA ITEM

SITE VIEWING (Date of visit 2nd January 2006 at 3.00 p.m.)

Regulatory Committee 03/01/2007

Report of the Executive Director

APPLICATION REF: WP/2006/0568/F

PROPOSAL: Change of use of redundant farm barns to B1.

LOCATION: Manor Farm, Strixton, Wellingborough.

APPLICANT: D Hutchinson Esq.

NOTE: This application was deferred by the Regulatory Committee on the 6th December 2006 to allow the Site Viewing Group to visit the site.

A letter from Wilbraham Associates Limited, written on behalf of some of the residents of Strixton who have objected to the scheme, was received on 11th December 2006. The contents of the letter have been copied in full.

“I refer to the above application which was considered by the planning committee yesterday and where a decision was deferred pending an inspection of the site.

We act for a number of residents of Strixton who have already objected to this application. The basis of our objection rests on the lack of, or conflicting, information submitted with the application and conflict with planning policy.

The application form at question 7 advises that 485 sq m of office space will be provided and 115 sq m of warehousing. The covering letter dated 12 September 2006 advises that the change of use will simply involve an internal skin of environmentally conscious design with new windows and doors and that there is space for a further ten car parking spaces on the site.

The A3 drawing 0620/2 which accompanies the application indicates that the gross floor area of the building is 725 sq m and not 600 sq m as indicated on the application forms. Furthermore warehousing as indicated in the covering letter is not a B1 use and that is the only use for which planning permission is sought. Drawing no. 0620/2 appears to indicate that the building would be used as three separate units and I assume that the dotted and dashed lines indicates cavity walls which would be required to meet the Building Regulations including the necessary fire protection between the three units.

The existing building was originally built as a Dutch barn although was subsequently adapted to form a grain store. In order to provide offices therefore 489900 © Crown Copyright. All rights reserved. WP/2006/0568/F 490100 Borough Council Of Wellingborough: Licence No.100018694. Published 21/11/2006 900 261900 261900

618 618

9 6 8

& 5 Tanks 7

11 4 & 2 10 3

Strixton Manor Business Centre

Wind Pump

617 617

k c a r T

261600 261600

489900 D 490100 900 Scale 1:1250 2 it will be necessary to replace the existing floor, construct new cavity walls, provide a first floor in the taller section of the building and a new roof covering. Those works would constitute a substantial, if not total, rebuilding of the structure which is not permitted by Policy G10 criterion 3. Whilst I am conscious that your Council has granted planning permission for the conversion of similar buildings to B2 and B8 uses, this type of building is not capable of adaptation to offices without substantial rebuilding. This is in contrast to traditional brick or stone barns which can be adapted fairly readily for this type of use.

The A4 site plan 0620/1 shows an area to the south-east of the building to be converted to be used for car parking and suggests that this is capable of accommodating ten cars. According to drawing no. 0602/2 this area measures 13.6m by 17.4m and this would be incapable of accommodating ten vehicles without some of the spaces blocking other vehicles. According to my calculations this area could only accommodate a maximum of seven cars.

At the meeting yesterday evening Mr Hutchinson indicated that he expects forty people to be working in the building following completion and as there is no public transport to speak of, and no settlements within reasonable walking or cycling distance, it is inevitable that the vast majority of employees will arrive by car, as is the case with the existing business centre. Even if two employees arrive per car that would represent a need for an additional twenty car parking spaces which clearly cannot be provided within the area designated on the plan.

Given the lack of public transport I would have expected the maximum number of parking spaces to be provided under your current standards. This would be 24 spaces based on 1 space per 30 sq m. Even so this would only represent one space per 2 employees plus 4 visitor spaces. If employees do not share cars there will be a need to park vehicles outside the site.

I understand that the Highway Authority have commented on this application and presumably did so on the basis that the total floor area was going to be in the order of 600 sq m. TRICS data card 4.3 indicates that an office development of this scale could generate between 94 and 145 vehicle movements per day and I see no reason why this should not apply here. If one takes a situation where there are forty employees and they each arrive in their own car then simply arriving and leaving at the start and end of the working day would result in forty vehicle movements. There would be additional movements during the lunch times, by visitors and by deliveries. Under the circumstances therefore it may be appropriate to seek the Highway Authority's further comments based on the actual floor area to be provided.”

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

BOROUGH COUNCIL OF WELLINGBOROUGH AGENDA ITEM

Regulatory Committee 06/12/2006

Report of the Executive Director

APPLICATION REF: WP/2006/0568/F

PROPOSAL: Change of use of redundant farm barns to B1.

LOCATION: Manor Farm, Strixton, Wellingborough.

APPLICANT: D Hutchinson Esq.

PROPOSAL AND DESCRIPTION OF SITE: A working farm within the village of Strixton, which has previously been granted planning permission for the conversion of a group of redundant, traditional curtilage listed buildings to restricted B1 office use, forms the application site. A single lane track with passing places provides access into and out of the site and is the only means of access to the village. This application seeks planning permission to convert a redundant grain store to part office use (B1) and part storage and distribution for a lighting firm currently occupying an office unit within the complex (B8).

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY: WP/2002/0133/F Change of use. Agricultural - B1 – approved with conditions. WP/2004/0170/LB Conversion of barns to B1 use – approved with conditions.

NATIONAL AND LOCAL PLANNING POLICY: G1, G5, G10 and E3 of the Borough of Wellingborough Local Plan.

SUMMARY OF REPLIES TO CONSULTATIONS/REPRESENTATIONS RECEIVED: 1. Strixton Parish Council – objects to the proposal on the following grounds:

• Inappropriate land use and would be detrimental to the character, amenity and peaceful nature of the village. • The single lane track will be insufficient to cope with the increased traffic flow. • Highway safety risk and detrimental to the fabric of the delimited single lane track. • Lighting assembly and distribution exceeds the definition of B1 usage for which the application has been made. • Increase in traffic and increase in heavy vehicles will add to traffic problems. • Barn is of no historical or architectural merit. • The expansion requires the resiting of a modern storage facility which would have to be determined in consultation with villagers. 4

2. Highways Authority – originally requested that the converted building be restricted to office use. Following reconsideration of the proposal the Highways Authority does not wish to raise an objection providing that the storage and distribution use by the lighting company is restricted to the part of the building served by the loading door. The Highways Authority has considered seeking a financial contribution towards the resurfacing of the access road however in light of the amount of contribution that would be requested and the cost of securing this by formal agreement there is doubt that this would be cost-effective.

3. Conservation Officer – no objections to the proposal.

4. Environment Agency – no objections. Informative comments have been made.

5. Third Parties – five letters of objection and one letter of concern have been received. Comments are summarised as follows:

• Additional growth unacceptable. • Development out of proportion with the size of the village. • Proposed lighting assembly use is out of keeping with this location. • Fabric and character of the village would be totally changed. • Development would result in a significant increase in traffic that would be detrimental to the village. • The existing road is unsuitable for this level of increase, being too narrow and unsighted for much of its length. • Safety would be detrimentally affected with the dangers presented by the existing road being exacerbated by the development. • Loss of parking to cottages at the bottom of the lane. • Access to the rear of the farm from the Grendon Road would be a better solution. • Increase in noise. • The building has no architectural merit. If it is redundant it should be demolished. • Conversion would require major new build element. • Granting of permission would set a precedent.

6. Five letters of support have been received from both businesses within the existing business centre and the Duchy of Lancaster.

• Businesses currently occupying the office development are thriving in this location. The expansion offers businesses the opportunity to grow without having to relocate. • Opportunity to grow within the same location offers stability for employees and the opportunity to employ more people from the local area. • The location is ideal for small businesses. • The business centre is well run and issues are dealt with by the owners without any resources from the local council. • Expansion will enhance the complex. 5

• The use of redundant buildings for commercial use should aid the sustainability of the rural economy.

ASSESSMENT: This application seeks planning permission for the conversion of a redundant grain store to part office use and part storage/distribution. The latter use will be occupied by a lighting company that currently occupies an office unit within the business complex at Strixton Manor and wishes to expand without relocating.

A ‘Dutch Barn’ built in 1893, originally an open hay barn and most recently used as a grain store, positioned within the farm complex has become redundant and is no longer required in connection with the agricultural use operating at the site. The barn can be described as functionally obsolete as it does not comply with current standards and legislation (a copy of a non-conformance report has been submitted by the applicant). Even if the barn were up to the required standard it would not be needed for agricultural purposes. Grain storage requirements have reduced due to the farm being awarded a 10 year Higher Level Environmental Stewardship contract which involves taking over 100 acres of intensive land out of production for the preservation of archaeological features and key species. It is intended that the majority of units that will be created will be used by those businesses currently located at the business centre which require additional space for growth and expansion.

Policies G1, G5, G10 and E3 are of relevance to this application. Policy E3 advises that, in the settlement of Strixton, proposals such as this are to be restricted to the conversion of suitable buildings in accordance with Policy G10. G5 also advises that development is not normally permitted in this location other than the reuse or conversion of suitable buildings where the design and materials used in external works sensitively reflect the quality of the village environment.

In this case it is considered that the proposal will not require substantial rebuilding works but will however require internal works and the insertion of openings externally to successfully convert the building. It is also considered that due to the structure predating 1900 it does have some historical merit and on balance is worthy of retention. It is however accepted that the building does not have outstanding architectural merit and is not curtilage listed as were those previously converted to form the business centre. It is recommended that a condition be imposed on the grant of permission to ensure that external design details, including the windows and doors to be formed, should be submitted and approved by the local planning authority prior to the commencement of the development. In principle however there is no objection to the external design changes proposed.

As discussed previously the barn is no longer required in connection with agricultural activities. The conversion of the redundant building to an alternative use will not result in the loss of the farm complex which still runs to the west of the redundant barn. Therefore the proposal will not result in any demand for a new farm complex.

One of the most important provisions of Policy G10 is point 2 which advises that permission will be granted for the conversion of buildings to other uses provided that the nature and scale of the new use will not have an adverse impact upon the surrounding area. The change of use itself will not result in any adverse impact, 6

however the traffic generated by the use would have an impact on the village and its occupiers. The Highways Authority has been consulted on this application and considers on balance that the proposal is acceptable providing that restrictive conditions are imposed. The Highways Authority has considered seeking a financial contribution from the applicant to resurface the road leading into the village. The level of contribution that would be sought in light of the cost of securing the contribution by way of formal legal agreement is not considered to be cost-effective and is therefore not being requested. It is also considered that the site benefits from adequate space for parking accommodation.

Overall it is considered that the proposal is in accordance with the relevant policies of the development plan and there are no other material planning considerations which constitute sustainable grounds 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 areas shown on additional plan 1 and 2 received 16/11/2006 for office use shall be used for B1 office use and for no other purposes (including any other purpose in class B1 of the schedule to the Town and Country (Use Classes Amendment) Order 2005, or in any other provision equivalent to that class in any statutory instrument revoking or re-enacting that order). 3. The area shown on additional plan 2 received 16/11/2006 for use as storage and distribution in connection with the lighting assembly business decribed in the application and for no other puropose (including any other purpose in class B8 of the schedule to the Town and Country (Use Classes Amendment) Order 2005, or in any other provision equivalent to that class in any statutory instrument revoking or re-enacting that order). 4. 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. 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. Prior to the commencement of development full details of external elevational changes, including all new external openings, shall be submitted to and approved by the local planning authority. 7. Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995 (or as amended) no development shall be carried out without express planning permission from the local planning authority, 7

other than those expressly authorised by this permission.

Reasons: 1. Required to be imposed pursuant to S51 of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004. 2. In the interests of highway safety. 3. In the interests of highway safety. 4. In the interests of the safety and convenience of users of the adjoining highway/s. 5. In the interests of visual amenity. 6. In the interests of amenity. 7. In the interests of amenity.

BOROUGH COUNCIL OF WELLINGBOROUGH AGENDA ITEM

SITE VIEWING (Date of visit 2nd January 2006 at 4.00 p.m.)

Regulatory Committee 03/01/2007

Report of the Executive Director

APPLICATION REF: WP/2006/0583/F

PROPOSAL: Demolition of garage and shed, construction of single storey granny annex and new double garage and retention of wooden fence- revised plan.

LOCATION: 5 Bradshaw Way, Irchester, Wellingborough.

APPLICANT: Mr and Mrs Mapley.

NOTE: This application was deferred at the previous meeting for the Site Viewing group to visit. The below comments were received post writing of the original report and were therefore included as late letter:

Letter from nearby occupier:

“We are writing to object to the proposed building works at 5 Bradshaw Way, Irchester.

The occupier moved the fencing at the side of the property forward approximately twelve months ago and the proposed plans show that the intention is to keep the fencing in the same place. This is illegal as this area is a vision splay and the movement of the fencing has created a serious health and safety risk. This side of the property is on a bend and faces a junction. The movement of the fencing forward has restricted the vision of both motorists and pedestrians using the road and pathway adjacent to the property. Traffic travels past this section of fencing at speed and cannot see children playing in the road or other vehicles trying to pull out from adjacent properties. It has also caused traffic to move towards the centre of the road in an attempt to see what is coming and there have been several near misses between facing cars. The plans do not show this area accurately as they show a curve facing the road when the fence is relatively straight.

Would you kindly advise us of the committee’s final decision.”

Letter from nearby resident:

) um th ( Pa

Recreation Ground

1 109 2 R 1

AW WAY

BRADSH

4 4

3 0

656 656

7 3

16 2 1

4 BRA 1 D S HAW

WAY

5 2

3 1

655 1 655 5 3

16 1

98 2 10 04 85.9m TCB 1 ( B 2 2 11 69 B 5 22 0

1 12 9 3 1 6 Sh 5

elt Gipsy Lane B

e 1 6 r 9 B Turn 5

7 3

265400 1 265400 8 5

491800 492000

1 919 1

Scale 1:1250 8 9 9

“As an objector to this application I had intended to address the committee but due to Parish Council duties, budget meeting, I am unable to do so. Had I done so the following would have been my presentation:

The proposal before you is not for a granny annex, by definition a granny annex is a self contained unit consisting of toilet/bathroom, cooking and sleeping accommodation with lounge area. What is before you is an application for additional downstairs toilet and lounge with a double garage.

I have no objection to anyone enhancing their property providing they have taken into consideration the impact that it has on adjoining residents, unfortunately this has not happened with this application.

At present when I exit from the conservatory into the rear garden I have on my right side the boundary fence between the applicant’s property and mine 1.85 metres high (6’) following onto their existing garage wall 5.07 metres long (16’6”) by 2.31 metres high (7’6”). If this application is approved in its present form I will be faced with a wall, the proposed lounge wall, measuring 8.46 metres long (27’6”) and at apex height 3.54 metres high (11’6”). I hope you will agree that a wall of this height is unacceptable especially when it can be resolved by the applicant and their architect by making the new lounge roof lean-to and hipped front and rear. These amendments would greatly reduce the adverse impact to my property and rear garden.

If the committee has any doubts I would gladly accommodate a site viewing.”

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

BOROUGH COUNCIL OF WELLINGBOROUGH AGENDA ITEM

Regulatory Committee 06/12/2006

Report of the Executive Director

APPLICATION REF: WP/2006/0583/F

PROPOSAL: Demolition of garage and shed, construction of single storey granny annex and new double garage and retention of wooden fence- revised plan.

LOCATION: 5 Bradshaw Way, Irchester, Wellingborough.

APPLICANT: Mr and Mrs Mapley.

This application comes before the Regulatory Committee because more than 3 letters of objection have been received from neighbours in reference primarily to the safety and convenience of the public highway.

PROPOSAL AND DESCRIPTION OF SITE: The application site is set within the village of Irchester and is located on the unclassified Bradshaw Way. The property forms a development of detached properties built in the late 1960’s.

The proposed development comprises firstly; the demolition of an existing south-west side garage and the erection of a single storey extension, with a pitched roof in its place. Secondly; the construction of a double, single storey garage to the north-east side of the property, which is to be accessed via the existing entrance and lastly the retrospective retention of a 1.8m high fence to the northern side of the property.

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY: WR/72/414 Extensions – approved.

NATIONAL AND LOCAL PLANNING POLICY: Borough of Wellingborough Local Plan Policies: G1 and H12. Minor Planning Applications that have an effect on the highway - 3.4.

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. Irchester PC – ‘no objections’

3. Summary of responses from 147, 149 and 151 Bradshaw Way:

• The fencing leads to a ‘black-spot’ on the bend and can be classed as a hazard for people living opposite and incoming and out coming traffic. • The fencing has resulted in the loss of common land.

In addition, 3 Bradshaw has objected to the southern side extension due to its increased height and concerns over the description of the application.

ASSESSMENT: Affect upon Neighbours Amenity The existing flat-roofed garage attached to the southern side elevation of the application property is to be demolished and replaced with a single storey side extension with a pitched roof. The extension is to protrude no further forward than the existing and therefore will have no additional loss of amenity to properties fronting the site. The extension will be screened from the view of the properties to the north-west of the site by the existing property and boundary fencing and vegetation. There are no windows proposed in the side elevation of the extension, although there is a velux window proposed in the front roof elevation, however due to its height is intended for light only, therefore there are no overlooking implications with regard the neighbouring property to the south-west of the site; 3 Bradshaw Way. No. 3 is set on a staggered plot set 8 metres further forward, although there is a conservatory to the rear elevation on the side with the application site. It is concluded that the proposed extension will not have any additional overshadowing implication to the rear of no. 3 than currently exists from the two storey dwelling. In addition, due to no. 3 being located to the south-east of the property there is no loss of direct sunlight as the extension does not dissect the arc of the sun.

The application also includes an attached double garage and the retention of 1.8m high fence to the properties northern elevation and will therefore be screened from no. 3 by the existing dwelling. As the proposed garage is single storey, the boundary fencing to the side and rear and the distance of the properties to the northern side of the site there are no loss of amenity issues with regard the garage or the fencing.

It is therefore considered that there are no loss of light or overlooking issues with regard this application and is therefore in accordance with Policy G1 of the Local Plan.

Loss of Amenity Space The extension to the properties south elevation results in no additional loss of amenity as it involves the demolition of the existing garage. Due to the property being located on a corner plot there is a relative large proportion of amenity space to the side of the property, this area is where the double garage is to be positioned and therefore the front and rear garden will remain unaffected by the proposed extensions. Therefore the loss to the properties amenity space is considered sustainable within the site and therefore does not lend its self 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. The properties in the vicinity vary in scale and type with semi-detached properties to the north and bungalows fronting the site, many of the properties have had additions over the years. It is therefore considered that the application is in accordance with policy G1 and H12 of the Local Plan in relation to the impact on the streetscene.

Planning Out Crime Implications Having consulted Supplementary Planning Guidance IV: Planning Out Crime in Northamptonshire there are no crime implications with regard the extensions and fencing. The erection of the double garage restricts access to the rear of the property, which in encouraged in the Planning Out Crime SPG.

Highway Implications The southern side extension is to go no closer to the highway than the existing dwelling, although the location of the double garage is to be closer to the highway, its location does not impact upon the visibility to the safety and convenience of highway. The access to the garage is to remain as presently exists and is to pass to the front of the dwelling; this access is ensured via conditioning as should access be permitted immediately to the front of the garage this would pose a risk to the safety of the highway.

Having consulted the NCC document ‘Minor Planning Applications that have an effect on the highway’ 3.4 and appendix 4, in respect to the location of the 1.8m high fencing. It is accepted that the fencing is to be located on the intersection in Bradshaw Way. Given that the speed limit is 30 mph on a minor road and that the design of Bradshaw Way is aimed at preventing vehicles turning into on-coming traffic in addition to the ‘tangential’ visibility splay drawn from the northern and western axis of the road junction affording a clear view of the highway or sight line, it is considered therefore that there are no highway grounds on which to refuse the application.

Response to Representations The advice given by the highways authority has been taken into account and the relevant guidance applied as discussed above, which has also discussed the concerns of the residents on highway matters. The impact of the extension upon no. 3 has also been discussed above.

Summary Having considered the above, there are no material planning considerations to justify refusal of this application and is therefore in accordance with Policies G1 and H12 and highway guidance and is hereby recommended for approval.

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. 13

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. 3. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the amended plan(s) deposited with the local planning authority on 01 November 2006. 4. There shall be no point of access to the garage other than from the existing access to the southern boundary.

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 the safety and convenience of the highway. 4. In the interests of the safety and convenience of the highway.

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 and H12 of the adopted Local Plan. 2. The applicant is advised that this decision relates to the following drawing numbers received on the dates shown: Drawing Number: Date Received: Brad/2006/08, Brad/2006/05, Brad/2006/06 & Brad/2006/07 26/09/2006 Brad/2006/04/A 01/11/2006 14

BOROUGH COUNCIL OF WELLINGBOROUGH AGENDA ITEM

SITE VIEWING (Date of visit 2nd January 2006 at 2.15 p.m.)

Regulatory Committee 03/01/2007

Report of the Executive Director

APPLICATION REF: WP/2006/0643/F

PROPOSAL: Extension and conversion of main house to form granny annex and construction of new attached garage with studio over - amendment to application WP/2005/0805/F approved 06 January 2006 - a reduced scheme and alterations to the external stairway (amended description).

LOCATION: 1 The Grange, Church Way, Ecton, Wellingborough.

APPLICANT: Mrs E C Edge and Mrs J A Edge.

This application is referred to the Regulatory Committee for determination because the Parish Council has objected to the proposal and the accompanying application for listed building consent is the subject of a visit from the Site Viewing Group.

PROPOSAL AND DESCRIPTION OF SITE: As described above. The garage to which the stairs are to be attached is nearly compete and is smaller than the scheme that has previously been approved.

There is an accompanying listed building application - WP/2006/0649/LB refers.

The application dwellinghouse is a grade II listed building that is located in the Ecton Conservation Area and benefits from a capacious garden area. On the boundary with High Street is a substantial stonewall of approximately 2.5m in height which continues along the northern and eastern boundaries. There is landscaping on the western and northern boundaries but it is sparse on the side that adjoins the Garden House to the east. The Garden House does have a large garage building situated in the northwest corner of its curtilage and it also has an unusual ground floor window that serves a living room also in the corner of the dwelling. The ground level of the site slopes gently down from the north to the south.

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY: WP/2005/0805/F and WP/2005/0807/LB Extension and conversion of main house to form granny annex and construction of new attached garage with studio flat over – both approved with conditions.

W W E VIE H L CHURC L I 1 rld's End N 8 G 482700 482900

D O 1 R 3 T H A Playground MP T 7 O N R O A ty l D n o u o o h C c n S o ry a War im r Meml

B 2 2 94.2m L ARSONS C 1 P

637 1 637

2 2

2 4 4 1

3 7 5 SUNN YSIDE se 1 n Hou 2 rde Old Estate Office

8 a 1

6 G

1 T 5 h

l d

B a 11 r n 10

Blacksmiths Yard

1 5 6 1 The Ecton 1 Grange

3 House a

17 6

6 Ecto 1

1 636 636

8 91.7m 1 B T CH

E UR

2 C E 2 H 1 WA R Y

T 2 3 Pear Tree S

24 Cottage

1 T a

2 5 E D

3 D 3 W 1 BM 92.99m 1

@( 5

3 4 5

7 2 St Mary Magdalen's C

3 4 k

1 3

1 7

0 4

1 4 5

8 9 1 9

2 1 2

2 1

4 9 4 Rectory Farmhouse 4 E PH

5 3 1 263500 263500 482700 482900

3 6 828 1

5 4 5

2 7 Scale 1:1250 4 1

a 3

6 3 4

8 4 15

NATIONAL AND LOCAL PLANNING POLICY: Regional Spatial Strategy 8 Northamptonshire County Structure Plan – AR6 and GS5 Borough of Wellingborough Local Plan – G1, G9, and G12 Supplementary Planning Guidance Residential Extensions: A Guide to Good Design and Planning Out Crime Planning Policy Statement 1 – Delivering Sustainable Development Planning Policy Guidance 15 – Planning and the Historic Environment.

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

• The stairway would be intrusive for the occupiers of the adjoining property. • The intended exterior facing materials would be out of character in a Conservation Area.

2. Conservation Officer – is content with the proposal.

3. Neighbours – no comment received at the time of writing the report.

ASSESSMENT: The material planning considerations are considered to be: • Effect on the listed building • Effect on the visual amenity of the conservation area • Compliance with residential design SPG • Effect on neighbours amenities • Use of an annex as a separate unit of accommodation • Crime and disorder

Effect on the listed building The planning application was accompanied by an application for listed building consent that will regulate the effect on the historic or architectural importance of the building.

Effect on the visual amenity of the conservation area The Council is under a duty to have special regard for the visual amenity of conservation areas when it is called upon to determine applications in the designated areas. It is considered that the reduced scheme combined with the more modest scale and use of the stated exterior facing materials will not have any harmful effect on the visual amenity of the conservation area.

Compliance with residential extension design SPG The proposal is thought to be congruent with the plan of the listed building and the proposal is therefore considered to comply with the provisions of the SPG.

Effect on neighbours’ amenities It is acknowledged that the scheme will have an effect on the standard of amenities that the occupiers of the surrounding dwellings currently enjoy but it is considered that the effects will only be marginal and not sufficient to warrant refusing the application for the following reasons:

• Adequate intervening distance of approximately 27m from the stairway to the nearest part of The Garden House and approximately 29m to no. 2 Parsons Close. • Infrequent use of the stairway. • Screen planting and substantial boundary walls.

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. 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, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the local planning authority. 3. The development hereby permitted shall not be occupied at any time other than for purposes ancillary to the residential unit known as The Grange, Church Way, Ecton. 4. Notwithstanding the provisions of The Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995, or any Order revoking or re-enacting that Order, the hereby approved extension shall not be altered in any way, including window insertions, without the express planning permission of the local planning authority. 5. Details of any garage door shall be submitted to the local planning authority and approved in writing. Any garage doors shall be inserted in accord with the agreed details.

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 ensure that the dwelling does not revert to more than one residential unit. 4. In the interests of privacy. 5. To protect the character of the listed building.

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 - AR6 and GS5 Borough of Wellingborough Local Plan - G1, G9, and G12 Supplementary Planning Guidance Residential Extensions: A Guide to Good Design and Planning Out Crime 17

Planning Policy Statement 1 - Delivering Sustainable Development Planning Policy Guidance 15 - Planning and the Historic Environment. 2. The applicant is advised that this decision relates to the following drawing numbers received on the date shown: Drawing Number: Date Received: 03c 20th October 2006

BOROUGH COUNCIL OF WELLINGBOROUGH AGENDA ITEM

SITE VIEWING (Date of visit 2nd January 2006 at 2.15 p.m.)

Regulatory Committee 03/01/2007

Report of the Executive Director

APPLICATION REF: WP/2006/0649/LB

PROPOSAL: Inclusion of external stair to give access to attic space over garage.

LOCATION: 1 The Grange, Church Way, Ecton, Wellingborough.

APPLICANT: Mrs E C Edge and Mrs J A Edge.

NOTE: This application was deferred by members at the previous Regulatory Committee meeting on 6th December 2006 to allow Site Viewing.

Members also requested inclusion of a full site history, which is as follows:

BW/77/115 Extension to dining room – approved. BW/88/0263/LB U-pvc replacement windows and door to dining room extension – approved. WP/2005/0805/F & WP/2005/0807/LB Extension and conversion of main house to form granny annexe and construction of new attached garage with new studio flat over - both approved. WP/2006/0613/LB & WP/2006/0614/F Demolition of existing sun room and lean-to extension, replacement with new sun room, internal alterations to kitchen, dining hall and bathroom - both approved. WP/2006/0643/F Amendment to application WP/2005/0805/F; a reduced scheme and alterations to the external stairway – awaiting determination.

W W E VIE H L CHURC L I 1 rld's End N 8 G 482700 482900

D O 1 R 3 T H A Playground MP T 7 O N R O A ty l D n o u o o h C c n S o ry a War im r Meml

B 2 2 94.2m L ARSONS C 1 P

637 1 637

2 2

2 4 4 1

3 7 5 SUNN YSIDE se 1 n Hou 2 rde Old Estate Office

8 a 1

6 G

1 T 5 h

l d

B a 11 r n 10

Blacksmiths Yard

1 5 6 1 The Ecton 1 Grange

3 House a

17 6

6 Ecto 1

1 636 636

8 91.7m 1 B T CH

E UR

2 C E 2 H 1 WA R Y

T 2 3 Pear Tree S

24 Cottage

1 T a

2 5 E D

3 D 3 W 1 BM 92.99m 1

@( 5

3 4 5

7 2 St Mary Magdalen's C

3 4 k

1 3

1 7

0 4

1 4 5

8 9 1 9

2 1 2

2 1

4 9 4 Rectory Farmhouse 4 E PH

5 3 1 263500 263500 482700 482900

3 6 828 1

5 4 5

2 7 Scale 1:1250 4 1

a 3

6 3 4

8 4 19

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

BOROUGH COUNCIL OF WELLINGBOROUGH AGENDA ITEM

Regulatory Committee 06/12/2006

Report of the Executive Director

APPLICATION REF: WP/2006/0649/LB

PROPOSAL: Inclusion of external stair to give access to attic space over garage.

LOCATION: 1 The Grange, Church Way, Ecton, Wellingborough.

APPLICANT: Mrs E C Edge and Mrs J A Edge.

This application is being reported to Committee for decision as a result of an objection from Ecton Parish Council which feels that the proposed work is out of character in the village conservation area.

PROPOSAL AND DESCRIPTION OF SITE: At the Regulatory Committee of 1 February 2006 Members approved a scheme to extend and convert The Grange to form a domestic annexe including construction of a new attached garage with studio flat over (reference WP/2005/0807/LB). The applicants had initially shown an external stair on the east gable of the flat to allow access to the unit, but subsequently withdrew this element of the scheme.

The present application is indeed for the external stair access.

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY: There is no other substantive planning history on this site.

NATIONAL AND LOCAL PLANNING POLICY: Borough of Wellingborough Local Plan Policy G12. County Structure Plan Policy AR6.

SUMMARY OF REPLIES TO CONSULTATIONS/REPRESENTATIONS RECEIVED: 1. Wellingborough Civic Society – no objection.

2. Ecton Parish Council –

“The materials to be used, shiplap boarding and stainless steel metalwork are not in keeping with the existing or surrounding properties and would therefore be out of character in a conservation area.” 20

ASSESSMENT: It is considered that although the materials proposed (natural slate, timber and stainless steel), are perhaps a little unusual, in conservation terms they are good quality and will display appropriate weathering characteristics over times. It should also be borne in mind in any case that the new staircase is approximately 60 metres back from the public highway and so will not be prominent in the street scene.

With due respect to the views of the Parish Council, the officer opinion is that the new proposed works will be aesthetically acceptable and will not be discordant in the local conservation area setting and that of the listed Grange.

RECOMMENDATION: Grant listed building consent, with conditions.

1. The works to which this consent relates must be begun not later than the expiration of three years from the date of this consent. 2. Full details of the following elements shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority before any work is commenced: i) canopy brackets; ii) balustrade/handrails; iii) stairs, including facing materials.

Reasons: 1. In order to comply with Section 18 of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990. 2. In the interests of visual amenity and to protect the character of the listed building and designated conservation area.

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: AR6 of the Northamptonshire County Structure Plan and G12 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: 1360/03C 20.10.2006 21

BOROUGH COUNCIL OF WELLINGBOROUGH AGENDA ITEM

SITE VIEWING (Date of visit 2nd January 2006 at 3.30 p.m.)

Regulatory Committee 03/01/2007

Report of the Executive Director

APPLICATION REF: WP/2006/0710/F

PROPOSAL: Change of use from workshop to residential.

LOCATION: 32 Thrift Street, Wollaston, Wellingborough.

APPLICANT: Mr and Mrs Horn.

This application is referred to the Regulatory Committee for determination because an objection has been lodged by the Parish Council and it requests a visit from the Site Viewing Group.

PROPOSAL AND DESCRIPTION OF SITE: As described above with the replacement of the existing shop window with a metal or wooden door.

The site is a property that is part residential and part retail located on the southern side of Thrift Street which comprises exclusively of terraced dwellings. There are double yellow lines on the same side of the road as the application site but parking is unrestricted on the other side. At the time of officer inspection there was heavy demand for the available on street parking spaces. At the rear of the property is a pair of conservatories that are divided by a concrete block wall and a boundary wall with no. 28 is a 1.8m high wall beyond which is a glazed addition with a corrugated plastic roof. On the western side is a single storey outrigger that adjoins no. 34’s own two and single storey outrigger.

The Council is in the process of determining a separate application on no. 30 Thrift Street for change of use from workshop to residential – WP/2006/0656/F refers. The consequence of both applications being approved would be to create two separate dwellings where at the present there is one dwelling with an associated workshop/retail use.

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY: WP/2005/0478/F Change of use from shop premises to domestic garage – refused. WP/2006/0061/F Change of use of shop to storage barn – refused.

th E

6 C 4 h ap G B el B E ui L

Borough Council Of Wellingborough: Licence No.100018694. Published6 13/12/2006 House T 0

907 E

E 3 5

262800 5 262800 R 4 T S W

P GH 3 I

5 H 2

Hall

5 0 W 7 orks 4 El

6 1 Sub Sta 1 5 4 17

7 4

9 6

3 44

4 S 2 4 1 1

T 2

The Boot Inn 7 2

3 3 4 M

(PH) 1 IC

H 1 k

A 7 r 3 o

6 2

2 E

2 L

627 2 ' 23 627

2 S

8 2 1

4 L

t A

C N

75.6m 2 2 1 n E 5 Surgery

o o 1 t

t 8 l 8 1 2 e 6 5 0 2

1 h 3

1 S 4 8 26 B 2 1 2 2 3 30 0 W 3 4 ks 1 3

Wks 1 2

( NEW 7 4 T

HR 5

8 IF 9

T 1 9 4

1 S TCB 2

T 3

R 2

EE 5 2

2 T 2 7

y 0 5 o 3 r 1 t PO

53 T a

1 2 9 r 6 0

5 4

E b 2 4 i

55 2 E

0 7

5 R

4 T 5 61

S 1

63 5 8 1

b L 6 lu I 7 n C C o h 71 t s C N

1 l 2 l U 6 5 p 9

o a 1

75 O 0

W B 0 7 77 626 17 C 626

4 7 74.7m COURT D

1 R 2 2 11 A

0 13

1 B 1

a 2

6 3 W 1

k 0 4 n

O 4

Pearson Ba B 7

4 7

1 8

8 .0 1

2 m

H 8

7 2

Mews 4

2 2 PH 3 B 65

5 78.3m

6 4 4

8 H

7 IN

8 4

6 5

2 9

6 9 2

3 2

1 Nag's Head

4 Inn 5 0 1 1 0 0 262500 1 262500 E 490600 V 490800 907O 29 GR 25 2

0 HE 8 T 8 1 Scale 1:1250

4 11

1 7 15

1 2

5 SE CLO

9 IELD

F 1 T 8

1 S

2 EA

7 F 22

NATIONAL AND LOCAL PLANNING POLICY: Regional Spatial Strategy 8. Northamptonshire County Structure Plan - GS5 and RE2. Borough of Wellingborough Local Plan – G1, G10, and S12 . Supplementary Planning Guidance – Parking and Planning Out Crime. Planning Policy Statement 1; Delivering Sustainable Development. Planning Policy Guidance 3; Housing. Planning Policy Statement 3; Housing - from the 1st April 2007, but contents are capable of being a material consideration before the date of coming into force. Planning Policy Statement 7; Sustainable Development in Rural Areas. Planning Policy Guidance 13; Transport.

SUMMARY OF REPLIES TO CONSULTATIONS/REPRESENTATIONS RECEIVED: 1. Highway Authority – refer to NCC publication for highways advice.

2. Wollaston Parish Council – originally expressed no objection to the application in a response received on 11th December 2006. The Parish Council has however countermanded its original representation by lodging an objection to the proposal which was received on 12th December 2006. In its second representation the Parish Council cites parking difficulties on the street as its reason for opposing the application.

3. Neighbours – no comment received.

ASSESSMENT: Material planning considerations: • Compliance with shopping policy • Effect on residential amenity • Effect on visual amenity • Parking • Crime and disorder

Compliance with shopping policy The main shopping policy to consider is S12 of the local plan which relates to changes of use away from shopping in the rural area. The explanatory text to the policy states that a change to an otherwise acceptable alternative use is unlikely to be resisted in Limited Development Villages or others with several retail units. Wollaston is classified in Local Plan Policy G4 as a Limited Development Village and this combined with the residual amount of shopping provision nearby leads to the opinion that the proposal is in accordance with development plan policy.

Effect on residential amenity It is considered that the conversion to residential use will not have an adverse effect on the amenities that are currently enjoyed by nearby occupiers for the following reasons:

• Reduction of pressure for on street parking from shoppers. • Deletion of a non domestic use that has not had its opening hours regulated by the planning system. • The reconfigured conservatory has a footprint that is marginally bigger than the existing conservatory and which butts up against a larger structure. 23

Effect on visual amenity There are no external changes necessary to the exterior of the building that fronts onto the street to accomplish the propose development.

Parking The application does not propose any off street provision for the use of the potential occupiers of the development and the respondents to the proposal have identified that there are car parking problems in the locally. The County Highway Authority however has not responded to the proposal other making referenced to its published highway standards document. It should perhaps be remembered that the use of the building could generate visits from large delivery vehicles during unsocial hours as well as cars. The Government advises in paragraph 60 of PPG 3 that developers should not be required to provide more care parking than they or the potential occupiers might want, nor to provide off-street parking when there is no need. Clearly, the applicant thinks that there is a market for houses that have no off-street car parking provision and this view accords with Government advice. With regards the adopted Car Parking SPG, paragraph 2 is titled ‘Flexibility for Car Parking Standards’ and it states that a lower provision than is set out in the maximum standards may be sought, particularly in locations that are accessible by means of transport other than the private car. The site is located reasonably close to the facilities and transport links that are available in the village, and there is therefore, no need to insist on off street car parking provision and it would be unwise to refuse the application for no car parking provision. Furthermore because of the existing demand for spaces over and above what is available on the street it has to be said that the parking situation is to a large degree self regulatory; this is because of the narrow width of the carriageway and when all the space that is available has been taken up with parked vehicles, drivers will by necessity have to park elsewhere.

Crime and disorder It is considered that there are no crime and disorder issues relevant to the determination of this application other than illegal parking which are offences under paragraphs 213 and 218 of The Highway Code and are currently enforceable by the Police.

RECOMMENDATION: Approve with a condition.

1. The development shall be begun not later than the expiration of three years beginning with the date of this permission.

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

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 24

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 RE2. Borough of Wellingborough Local Plan - G1, G10, and S12. Supplementary Planning Guidance - Parking and Planning Out Crime. Planning Policy Statement 1; Delivering Sustainable Development. Planning Policy Guidance 3; Housing. Planning Policy Statement 3; Housing. Planning Policy Statement 7; Sustainable Development in Rural Areas. Planning Policy Guidance 13; Transport. 2. The applicant is advised that this decision relates to the following drawing numbers received on the date shown: 17th November 2006

BOROUGH COUNCIL OF WELLINGBOROUGH AGENDA ITEM

Regulatory Committee 03/01/2007

Report of the Executive Director

APPLICATION REF: WP/2006/0252/F

PROPOSAL: Conversion of one building to apartments and demolition of remainder and redevelopment for apartments (Amended Plans received 25 October 2006).

LOCATION: Tower Boot Co. Limited, 104 Wellingborough Road, Finedon, Wellingborough.

APPLICANT: The Tower Property Group.

NOTE: This application was deferred at the Regulatory Committee meeting of 20th September 2006 to enable officers to negotiated with the applicant to achieve a better-designed scheme.

Members were concerned that the proposed development did not complement the street scene or enhance the area, which included listed buildings. Following fruitful negotiations with the applicant, however, officers are pleased to report that the architectural and functional design of the scheme is now much improved. The proposed development now incorporates simpler elevations and materials, a lower roofline, a greater set-back on the Laws Lane frontage and security gates at the vehicular and pedestrian accesses. Additionally the unit total has been reduced from 48 to 45 whilst car parking provision is improved by adding an extra 7 spaces to give 55 in all.

Through the negotiations it has been agreed to incorporate additional energy-efficiency measures in the build and these are covered in the additional conditions scheduled below.

The present amended application was made subject to re-consultation procedures and as a result one letter of objection was received from a third party querying the need for more flats in Finedon. In respect to this point, it is suggested that this issue could not reasonably be a reason to refuse the application as it is largely a developer’s prerogative as to the form of domestic accommodation to be built, which is of course market-driven. The only other response to consultations was from County Highways with detailed comments which are again reflected in the additional conditions schedule below.

34 WATER

3 2

0 1 2 8 BRID 49 9a 1 47 53

23 51 26 491800

491600 19 WP/2006/0252/F 2 2

k Borough Council Of Wellingborough: Licence20 No.100018694. Published 06/09/2006 39 16

9 14 PH

1 917 1 2 0

3 272000 8 272000 4 7

2 15 PH

6 2 8 4 A PAR T F 3

F 1 E 2 T L E R

E KER

E 4 R

R o 4

7 2 3

C 0

T 1 AC S 2 K L 4 L S B 5 E

E 3

Church 2

R 3a 6 W 1

ID 3 1 1 G 2 E

5 1

th 0 1 l 1 1

a 1

He tre I 8 9 R 6 en 8

C E O 1 66 R 7 UA N 70 68

Q 1 S 72

4 S T 1

EN O

1 2 4 B 3 N 7

L t 10 O 4 o E

D 9 3 6 C

82 5 T

1 7

1 Wentworth 3 5 P 719 14 L 1 719 A 5 O 1 Farm W U M a S N Mackworth D 7 1 L 9 8

9 Green A P 0 8

8 7

3 8 N 2 L 1 1 9

6 E 6

1 5

2 A

2 0

1 89 a

5 2 9 l 1 10 ia or em M 1 2 r

5 a @

( 6

1 PO

1 0 0 1 N B D M ( A 8 L 0 ry TCB .

E 4 2

o 1 2 0 0 t 3 C c 1 m L 5 a O F Club 1 S E 3

0 1

718 7 718

4 109 5

4 El Sub Sta 4

1 3 8 1

3 5 1 5

E 80.2m 1 7 N B 1 7 a A 1 9

L 1 9 a

7 2

Y 1 1 1 7

V 2

I 3

9 2

2 3

1 a

1 1 2 C 5

1 6 5 a O M

1 E 1 R 2 7 7 R

OA 6 D

271700 271700

491600 9 491800

917 28

3 3 1 1 @ Scale 1:1250 ( 2 1 3 m 2 4 8 . 6 1 8 E W M Stonehaven 0 8 E 26

It is recommended, therefore, that subject to the applicant’s willingness to enter into a Section 106 legal agreement as indicated in the original report and subject to the addition of the following conditions to the schedule contained at the end of that report, planning permission should be granted for the amended development scheme.

Additional conditions:

13. (Amended) The development shall be carried out in accordance with the amended plan(s) deposited with the local planning authority on 25/10/2006. 14. The car parking space beside the Laws Lane access shall be omitted and suitable surface treatment specified and agreed in writing with the local planning authority to prevent casual parking at this point. 15. Full details of the design of the gates shall be submitted for the written approval of the local planning authority prior to the commencement of development. 16. Block C shall be faced in traditional local cropped stone and coursed and pointed to a detailed specification to be agreed in writing with the local planning authority prior to commencement of the development. 17. A scheme for external lighting and internal lighting of communal areas, to be at least in part powered by renewable sources, shall be agreed by the local planning authority before the start of construction.

Reasons: 13. To ensure that the development is carried out in accordance with the agreed amendments. 14. In the interests of highway safety. 15. To preserve the setting of nearby listed buildings. 16. In the interests of energy efficiency. 17. In the interests of carbon output reduction. 27

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

BOROUGH COUNCIL OF WELLINGBOROUGH AGENDA ITEM

SITE VIEWING (Date of visit 19th September 2006 at 1.15 p.m.)

Regulatory Committee 20/09/2006

Report of the Executive Director

APPLICATION REF: WP/2006/0252/F

PROPOSAL: Conversion of one building to apartments and demolition of remainder and redevelopment for apartments (48 in total) (Amended Plans).

LOCATION: Tower Boot Co. Limited, Wellingborough Road, Finedon, Wellingborough.

APPLICANT: The Tower Property Group.

PROPOSAL AND DESCRIPTION OF SITE: (As above). This application relates to the site (extending to 0.32 hectares) of the premises of the former Tower Boot and Shoe works which are now vacant, having until recently been used as a bathroom products showroom and stores for the firm Watermark. Prior to the last use, the premises were used for the finishing of footwear by the Griggs Group and originally they were a boot and shoe factory. It is proposed to convert the existing three storey block to provide 6 apartments and to redevelop the remainder of the structures on the site with new buildings, to provide a further 40 units (the majority of which are 1 bedroom units). This approximates to a density of just over 138 units per hectare.

The site is located on the west side of Wellingborough Road between its junctions with Laws Lane and Ivy Lane. It is broadly rectangular in shape and has a principle frontage onto the lay-by which faces Wellingborough Road. It also has a shorter north-eastern boundary to Laws Lane. The remaining rear and south-western boundaries of the site abut rear gardens and a public footpath serving established housing at Mackworth Green. In the wider context the site is surrounded by well established residential development although Wellingborough Road itself is fronted by some shops and commercial premises.

The existing buildings on the site comprise the attractive and interestingly detailed three storey traditional factory building of Victorian appearance which is to be retained, with to the side and rear more utilitarian single storey extensions of the ‘north light’ roof design. In addition, there is a much more recent shallow pitched roof steel framed and profile clad building at the rear of the site.

The site has two points of access, one from Wellingborough Road between the flank wall of the three story block and the public footpath running alongside the adjoining house. The other access is located on Laws Lane, close to a further access serving the rear of the properties fronting Mackworth Green.

The new build proposals comprise a series of inter-connected three storey blocks (30 apartments) stretching around the Wellingborough Road and Laws Lane frontages and 2 three storey blocks (10 apartments) at the rear, effectively creating a courtyard. Both points of access will be retained. The Wellingborough Road access will serve the retained and converted 3 storey block and the 2 three storey blocks at the rear. The Laws Lane access will serve the remainder of the scheme. There will not be any vehicular connection between the two separate access areas.

In design terms, the scheme has taken references (particularly in terms of materials and detailing) from the retained 3 storey block. The blocks that wrap around the frontage comprise varying heights, projections, roof slopes and gables so as to articulate the structure and also to accommodate and reflect the gentle slope down Laws Lane. Bin storage is provided in the Courtyard and adjoining the flank wall of Block B. Amenity space is provided throughout the scheme in small areas adjoining the car parking areas (46 car parking spaces are provided).

The application was accompanied by a ‘Supporting Planning Statement’, a ‘Design Statement’, a ‘Site Check Review’ and a ‘Structural Investigation and Report’. Since its submission it has been the subject of detailed negotiation and as a result revisions were carried out to the design and scale of the frontage buildings with original 4 storey elements and 2 apartment units being omitted. A further round of public consultation was carried out in respect of the revised proposals.

This application is reported to Regulatory Committee for determination due to its size and scale and the number of objections received. The Parish Council has requested that a Site Viewing takes place.

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY: The history record cards indicate a fairly extensive planning history from 1948 and relating mostly to extensions and alterations to the factory buildings

NATIONAL AND LOCAL PLANNING POLICY: Local Plan: G1, G4, H2, H12 and E4. County Structure Plan: GS3, GS5, H3 and H6. PPS 1, PPS7, PPG 3. SPG: II.

SUMMARY OF REPLIES TO CONSULTATIONS/REPRESENTATIONS RECEIVED: 1. Finedon Parish Council – requests a Site Viewing as Parish Councillors are unhappy with the density of one bedroom apartments and with the size of the development. They feel that there are too many flats, not enough affordable homes and that there are issues with parking.

2. Environment Agency – has no objection to the proposed development but recommends the imposition of a condition requiring an investigation of any 29

contamination of the site (due to its previous use) before any develop commences.

3. County Highway Authority – no objections are registered but standard conditions are recommended in relation to the points of access and the frontage of the site.

4. Environmental Health Officer – a condition should be imposed to require that a further Environmental Risk assessment be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority.

5. Conservation Officer - Discussions and negotiations undertaken with the applicant has resulted in an improved scheme on the Wellingborough road frontage but still has some concerns regarding the impact of the proposals on the setting of Mackworth Green Listed Grade II complex.

6. Third Parties – 6 objections from local residents to the scheme as submitted (first round of public consultation) raising concerns about (i) influx of new residents equivalent to 60/75% of the indigenous population as a result of all the apartment developments in Finedon and due to age of prospective occupiers will create an imbalance in the resident population; (ii) highway safety issues will arise in respect of the Laws Lane access point; (iii) anti social problems and noise will arise; (iv) overlooking of Mackworth Green properties; (vi) insufficient parking; (vii) overdevelopment; (viii) should be used for existing use; and, (ix) traffic generation .

7. 6 further objections were received from local residents in respect of the second round of public consultation repeating points of objection made previously and in addition: (i) parking congestion will arise in Laws Lane; (ii) density of scheme is still excessive; (iii) local services inadequate; (iv) scale of the scheme will still be overbearing and create overlooking; (vi) car parking still inadequate; (vii) concerns raised about possible health risks when asbestos and other possible contaminants in the existing buildings/on the site, are removed and in respect of radon gas levels in the area; (viii) possible noise nuisance if the flats are inadequately insulated; (ix) a scheme of flats will not help the problem of the falling population of the school; and, (x) the calibre of future occupants is questioned.

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 an overall presumption in favour of redevelopment of a site of this kind and present use in this type of location subject to the consideration of Local Plan Policy E4 (see below). The national planning policy guidance advice is to concentrate new development within 30

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. Whilst the policy framework in the Local Plan Policy E4 seeks whenever possible to retain existing sites in employment use, this is only on the basis that the existing commercial use of the present buildings and site is economically viable. In addition, in relation to historic and established developed areas where a mixture of uses is prevalent but the predominant use is residential, the impacts arising from a continuation of commercial use (if indeed this is likely) in contrast to residential redevelopment, must be carefully evaluated. In this particular instance an assessment and marketing exercise was carried out by Blacklee Smith Chartered Surveyors. Despite a full marketing campaign for nearly 6 months, there has been no suitable commercial interest in the property. This is considered to be due to the fact that the major part of the buildings provide very poor industrial floorspace, having internal headroom of only 3.35m and the floorspace is restricted by internal piers that support the roof structure. The upper floor former offices are in a dilapidated state and access for the delivery of goods is not too modern standards.

(ii) The site is to be developed by the careful positioning and laying out of the new buildings 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. 10 refers) to cover the concern regarding the height of the units on the site. There are not considered to be any crime and disorder issues arising in respect of this application, notwithstanding the fears that have arisen about future possibilities in this regard.

(iii) The necessity of an environmental risk assessment mentioned by the Environmental Health Officer and the Environment Agency can be secured by a condition (Proposed condition no. 9 refers). Likewise conditions can be stipulated to secure a satisfactory means of access to the site in technical terms, in line with the request of the County Highway Authority (Proposed Conditions nos. 6, 7 and 8 refer). The applicant’s architect has provided illustrations in response to the Conservation Officer’s concern to demonstrate that the scheme does not dominate the Mackworth Green properties, or adversely disrupt views of them. The concerns raised by local residents in respect of overlooking are not felt to be relevant due to the separation distance from the proposed apartments to existing residential properties. In addition, three storey flat development close to existing properties has been approved recently on similar sites close by. Access and car parking arrangements/provision is in line with the standards for a development of this scale in this location. In addition, it is subject to the imposition of conditions to cover technical construction requirements and the county Highway Authority has no concerns in this regard.

(iv) This application is of a scale that requires the applicants to enter into a Section 106 legal agreement in respect of the Planning Obligations that arise. Contributions in this instance have been identified as being needed in respect of education, affordable housing (this is likely to be met by supplying a number of the units earmarked for this purpose), enhancements to existing nearby play and youth 31

facilities, plus a commuted sum for maintenance of the same; recruitment of trainees from the STACT programme when development is carried out, provision of communal waste bins and possible improvements to bus infrastructure at the lay-by on the frontage of the site.

Conclusion

Subject to the applicant being willing to enter into a Section 106 legal agreement to secure the contributions as indicated above, there is no reason why this application should not be approved subject to the conditions indicated.

RECOMMENDATION: Approve with conditions.

1. The development shall be begun not later than the expiration of three years beginning with the date of this permission. 2. Representative samples of all external facing and roofing materials shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority before the development is commenced. 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. 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 apartments are occupied. 5. Prior to the commencement of development a scheme for sound insulation between the apartments shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The agreed scheme shall be completed before the apartments are occupied. 6. Any gates at the entrance to the development must be hung so as to open inwards only and must be set back sufficiently to permit the longest vehicle that can be expected to visit the site to stand clear of the carriageway whilst the gate is operated. 7. The points of access at each end of the frontage into the development must be laid out to a width of 4.5m for the first 10m from the highway boundary and reconstructed as appropriate in accordance with the specification of Northamptonshire County Council and using materials compatible to the existing surfaces. To prevent loose material being carried onto the highway the first 5m of the drive length must be hard paved. 8. To provide pedestrian to vehicle visibility, splays of 2m x 2m must be provided and maintained on both sides of each point of the access.

9. Before development is commenced an Environmental Risk Assessment (ERA) to assess the potential for contamination of the site shall be submitted to the local planning authority. Should the ERA reveal that the site is subject to contamination a scheme for its remediation shall be submitted to the local planning authority and approved in writing. The approved remediation scheme shall be implemented and completed to the satisfaction of the local planning authority before the dwellings are first occupied. 10. Before development is commenced the finished floor levels of the hereby approved dwellings in relation to the adjacent properties shall be submitted to the local planning authority and approved in writing. 11. Before the development hereby approved is commenced a scheme shall be submitted to the local planning authority in writing to demonstrate how the history of the use of the buildings on the site is to be marked and commemorated as part of the new development. The scheme shall then be implemented and maintained thereafter. 12. Before the development commences a scheme for refuse collection shall be submitted in writing and approved by the local planning authority. 13. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the amended plan(s) deposited with the local planning authority on 12/07/2006.

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 visual amenity. 4. In the interests of amenity and privacy. 5. In the interests of residential amenity. 6. In the interests of highway safety. 7. In the interests of highway safety. 8. In the interests of highway safety. 9. In the interests of assessing any potential contamination of the site and to implement the necessary remediation measures. 10. In the interests of residential amenity. 11. To maintain some continuity with the former purpose and function of the site in the interests of local history and local identity. 12. Before the development commences a scheme for refuse collection shall be submitted in writing and approved by the local planning authority. 13. 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 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 the following policies: GS3, GS5, H3, H6 of the Northamptonshire County Structure Plan and G1, G4, H2, H12, E4 of the Borough of Wellingborough Local Plan. 33

2. The applicant is advised that this decision relates to the following drawing numbers received on the dates shown: Drawing Number: Date Received: 994.42.04; 990.44.04 21/004/2006 994.31.116;994.3418;994.37.3;994.38.11; 12/07/2006 994.39.10; 994.40.10; 994.43.11; 12/07/2006 994.44.01 24/07/2006 3. The applicant should ensure that refuse collection arrangements of the proposal are discussed with the appropriate officer of the Borough Council. The Borough Council's Amenities Performance Manager has indicated that the size and location of the 'bin areas' shown on the submitted drawing is unacceptable. The need is for 16 no. 1100L bins and these should be located as close to the highway as possible. 4. In carrying out the development hereby approved, please ensure that the provisions of the Party Wall Act 1996 are upheld.

BOROUGH COUNCIL OF WELLINGBOROUGH AGENDA ITEM

Regulatory Committee 03/01/2007

Report of the Executive Director

APPLICATION REF: WP/2006/0556/O

PROPOSAL: Outline planning consent for 3 no. dwellings.

LOCATION: 31 Land at rear Station Road, Finedon, Wellingborough.

APPLICANT: MrJ Gibbard.

This application is referred to the Regulatory Committee for determination because the Parish Council has objected to the proposal along with more than two local residents.

PROPOSAL AND DESCRIPTION OF SITE: As described above. The density of the proposed development is 10 dwellings per hectare.

The application site is an expansive area of garden land that is associated with the Gate House which is located at the junction of Mackworth Drive and Station Road. The site has been landscaped with shrub and tree planting and there is also a small pond in the western corner. On the highway boundary is a high laurel hedge and on the rear boundary is a close boarded fence.

The application site is located entirely outside the village policy line which runs along its western, southern and eastern boundaries. The proposal site is also contiguous in its southeastern corner with the Finedon Conservation Area which also runs close to the eastern site’s boundary.

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY: WP/93/163 Change of use of agricultural land to residential curtilage – conditionally approved. Condition no. 2 of the above planning permission is: “Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning General Permitted Development Order 1988 or as amended, no garages, sheds or other buildings or structures shall be erected without the express permission of the local planning authority”. WP/2002/432 Erection of a house – refused for being contrary to Policies G6 and H4 of the Borough of Wellingborough Local Plan.

491000 © Crown Copyright. All rights reserved. WP/2006/0556/OBM 491200 Borough Council Of Wellingborough: Licence@ (No.100018694.83.13m Published 13/12/2006 911 272200 272200 S T A T IO N R y O a w A il a D R d e tl 79.9m B n a m is D Cricket

79.7m B

721 721

Gate House 3 Hall2

IVE DR 77. Museum H T e Lodge R rag O ica e V KW Th C ool A Sch e M ous H Th

720 2 720 5

1 Chantry House

9 3

Bede 1 7 House 1

St M 1 4

Church House

2 to 5 Ch 1 7 k

(

2 @ 4 7 2 BM 76.30m M A C K W 2 O 3

R to 1 T 2 h T 3 YK e H 3 LL LA Ic O e D HW T R o 271900 w I Finedon Hall 271900 e V

491000 491200

1 r E 911 0

3 Scale 1:1250

L 2 WA 5 35

NATION AND LOCAL PLANNING POLICY: Regional Spatial Strategy 8. Northamptonshire County Structure Plan – AR6, GS5, H3, H5 andH6. Borough of Wellingborough Local Plan – G1, G4, G6, G13, H3, H4, H12 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 Statement 7; Sustainable Development in Rural Areas.

SUMMARY OF REPLIES TO CONSULTATIONS/REPRESENTATIONS RECEIVED: 1. NCC Highways – gives highway specification advice and also makes the following comments:

• Site appears to lie outside the village policy line. • Scheme includes a new access road to the north and in order for appropriate advice to be given its status and purpose must be ascertained.

2. Finedon Parish Council – objects to the application because it considers that the ground is outside the policy line.

3. Council’s Conservation and Design Officer –

“I feel in conservation terms that these units are not objectionable and if properly designed they will fit acceptably into the existing attractive landscape.”

4. Neighbours – objections have been received from the occupiers of 2, 8 Holly Walk; 20, 22, 24 and 26 Mackworth Drive who cite the following reasons for opposing the scheme:

• Layout is not in sympathy with the surrounding development and will detract from the appearance of the area. • Detrimental effect on wildlife. • Loss of light. • Loss of privacy. • Position of the garages backing onto the road will have an unacceptable appearance and would also inhibit visibility splays for emerging traffic and other highway safety issues. • Query regarding the roadway terminating at the boundary of the site which indicates that there could be further planning applications for development in the countryside. • Site is beyond the village policy line. • Reference to local drainage problems that could be exacerbated by the proposed development. One writer opines that the Council would be “unbelievably negligent” if it does not consider all the ramifications of its decisions.

5. Anglian Water Services – No comment received at time of writing the report.

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

Compliance with policy The application site abuts the Finedon Conservation Area and Policy AR6 of the structure plan and Policy G13 of the local plan both aim to protect the setting of conservation areas from the effects of adjacent new development. The Government has recently introduced the need for applications to include design and access statements that are detailed in DCLG Circular 01/2006 with most applications which, amongst other things, are intended to afford Local Planning Authorities the opportunity to more adequately assess the effect of a proposed development on its surroundings. The Circular requires that indicative information should be provided that details the use, amount of development, layout, scale parameters and access points. The applicant has supplied adequate information in this respect and it is clear that the proposed development by way plot size, scale and indicated facing materials, if approved, would not have any demonstrable harm on the setting of the adjacent conservation area.

The application site has been granted planning permission from agricultural land to residential curtilage and it is clear from condition no. 2 attached to planning permission WP/93/162 that it was intended that the land should remain undeveloped. Over time the site has taken on the appearance of a domestic garden, but despite this change in character it is still situated outside the village policy line as defined by the local plan. The fact that the land has lost all vestiges of its former bucolic form is irrelevant. Policy H5 of the County Structure Plan and policies G6 and H4 of the Borough of Wellingborough Local Plan all set out restrictive criteria for housing development to be acceptable in the open countryside which involves the reuse or replacement of dwellings or those that are justified for reasons of agricultural or forestry occupancy. The applicant has not supplied any justification or additional information with the application that would indicate that the scheme should benefit from any of the exemptions to these constraining policies. The proposal is therefore considered to be contrary to Policy H5 of the County Structure Plan and Policies G6 and H4 of the Borough of Wellingborough Local Plan.

Effect on visual amenity of the area The site has been described above and it is considered that if the proposal is approved the effect on the visual amenity of the street can be adequately assessed at the approval of reserved matters stage.

Effect on neighbours’ amenities The comments of the nearby neighbours are noted and it is accepted that the proposed scheme will have an effect on the standard of amenities that are currently enjoyed by the adjacent occupiers. It is considered however that the possible detrimental effect on their amenities can again be adequately assessed within the scope of any reserved matters application.

Crime and disorder There are not considered to be any crime and disorder issues pertinent to the determination of this application.

None material considerations The concerns of the local residents with regard to the ability of the local sewerage infrastructure to accommodate any increased flow have been forwarded to Anglian Water Services Limited. The following details however should be noted:

• If approved, the applicant will have the right to connect to Anglian Water’s public sewers under Section 106 of The Water Act 1991 and it is up to the statutory undertaker to ensure that there is sufficient capacity in the system to accommodate the increased flow. • Any connection to the public sewer must comply with the Building Regulations.

RECOMMENDATION: Refuse for being contrary to the following Development Plan policies: • H5 of the County Structure Plan • G6 and H4 of the Borough of Wellingborough Local Plan

1. The application site is in the open countryside and the proposal is therefore contrary to Policy H5 of the County Structure Plan and Policies G6 and H4 of the Borough of Wellingborough Local Plan.

POLICY G6

DEVELOPMENT IN THE OPEN COUNTRYSIDE WILL NOT BE GRANTED PLANNING PERMISSION UNLESS:

1. IT CANNOT BE ACCOMMODATED OTHER THAN IN THE OPEN COUNTRYSIDE; 2. IT INVOLVES NO MORE THAN A LIMITED NUMBER OF BUILDINGS OR STRUCTURES AND THESE ARE SMALL SCALE; 3. IT INCLUDES LANDSCAPE SCREENING, AS APPROPRIATE, AND ALL BUILDINGS AND STRUCTURES ARE DESIGNED, SITED AND OF MATERIALS TO MINIMISE ADVERSE IMPACT UPON THE INTRINSIC CHARACTER OF THE COUNTRYSIDE; 4. IT WILL NEITHER INDIVIDUALLY NOR CUMULATIVELY WITH EXISTING OR PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT, RESULT IN A LOCAL PROLIFERATION OF NEW BUILDINGS OR STRUCTURES; 5. WHEN IT INVOLVES A USE WHICH IS PRINCIPALLY TO SERVE THE TOWN, IT IS LOCATED IN IMMEDIATE PROXIMITY TO EXISTING OR PROPOSED URBAN DEVELOPMENT; AND 6. IT WILL NOT RESULT IN THE URBAN GROWTH OF NORTHAMPTON TO ITS EAST OR WELLINGBOROUGH TO ITS WEST.

POLICY H4

PLANNING PERMISSION WILL NOT BE GRANTED FOR RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT IN EITHER THE OPEN COUNTRYSIDE OR THE RESTRAINT VILLAGES OF EASTON MAUDIT, STRIXTON OR SYWELL OLD VILLAGE. EXCEPTIONS MAY, HOWEVER, BE MADE FOR ESSENTIAL AGRICULTURAL OR FORESTRY WORKERS DWELLINGS, REPLACEMENT DWELLINGS, THE CONVERSION OF SUITABLE BUILDINGS IN RESTRAINT VILLAGES AND AFFORDABLE HOUSING IN THE OPEN COUNTRYSIDE ON THE EDGE OF OTHER VILLAGES WHERE THIS DEVELOPMENT IS IN ACCORDANCE WITH POLICY H9.

POLICY H5C

IN THE OPEN COUNTRYSIDE HOUSING DEVELOPMENT WILL ONLY BE PERMITTED WHERE:

- IT REUSES A BUILDING WHERE EVERY REASONABLE ATTEMPT HAS BEEN MADE TO SECURE SUITABLE BUSINESS RE-USE; AND

- IT REUSES A BUILDING THAT WILL NOT REQUIRE COMPLETE OR MAJOR RECONSTRUCTION AND THERE ARE NO DETRIMENTAL EFFECTS ON THE BUILDING OR ITS SURROUNDINGS; OR

- IT REPLACES AN EXISTING DWELLING, PROVIDED THAT THE DWELLING IS OF THE SAME GENERAL SIZE, MASSING AND BULK AS THE ORIGINAL DWELLING AND SITED ON THE SAME FOOTPRINT; OR

- IT IS ESSENTIAL FOR THE EFFICIENT RUNNING OF AN AGRICULTURAL OR FORESTRY HOLDING. A FUNCTIONAL AND FINANCIAL TEST OF THE HOLDING MAY BE REQUIRED TO ESTABLISH IF IT IS ESSENTIAL TO PROVIDE THE HOUSING DEVELOPMENT IN THE OPEN COUNTRYSIDE. WHERE AN ESSENTIAL NEED IS PROVEN PREFERENCE WILL BE GIVEN TO THE CONVERSION OF AN EXISTING BUILDING BEFORE THE CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW DWELLING.

WHEN CONSIDERING SUCH PROPOSALS, THE APPROPRIATENESS OF THE MATERIALS, DESIGN AND SITING WILL BE FUNDAMENTAL TO THE GRANTING OF PLANNING PERMISSION.

INFORMATIVE/S: 1. The applicant is advised that this decision relates to the following drawing numbers received on the date shown: Drawing Numbers: Date Received: 14-06-01 and 14-06-02 11th October 2006 2. 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, 39

Riverside Way, Northampton NN1 5NX prior to any construction/ excavation works within the public highway. 40

BOROUGH COUNCIL OF WELLINGBOROUGH AGENDA ITEM

Regulatory Committee 03/01/2007

Report of the Executive Director

APPLICATION REF: WP/2006/0602/F

PROPOSAL: Conservatory to rear and window (lounge) to side.

LOCATION: 51 Stanwell Way, Wellingborough.

APPLICANT: Mr M Dalby.

This application is referred to the Regulatory Committee for determination because three representations of objection have been received from neighbouring occupiers.

PROPOSAL AND DESCRIPTION OF SITE: As described above.

The site is a detached bungalow located in a mature residential area of the town. Locally the housing is varied with detached, semi-detached and bungalows and houses all being evident in the street scene. The adjacent dwellings are both houses; no. 53 has a flat roofed two storey side extension on the side nearest to the application site and no. 49 has a flat roofed two storey rear extension that is built upto the boundary. The neighbouring dwellings to the application building both extend slightly further back into their respective plots and the ground level of the application site and the adjacent gardens all fall noticeably away from the backs of the buildings. On the boundary with no. 49 are 1.8m high fence panels at the back of the house and others that are approximately 1.5m high. On the boundary with no. 53 are 1.5m high panes.

At the time of Officer Inspection previously approved extension works were nearing completion and the concrete base for the proposed conservatory had already been laid.

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY: WP/2006/0005/F Loft conversion plus rear extension and conservatory to rear – withdrawn. WP/2006/0115/F Loft conversion plus rear extension and conservatory to rear – withdrawn. WP/2006/330/F Single storey rear extension forming sitting room and bathroom – conditionally approved.

3 4

4 2 AD O R E R LA

487200 C 487400

2 Borough Council Of Wellingborough: Licence No.100018694. Published 13/12/2006 1 873 62 2 267200 267200

3 E 1 U 54 N E V A N O 8 T 3 IL

S M

1 T

2 7 A

N 3 W E LL

A 52 V V Y V V FF

W C

V V

0 Y 5 4

1 6

F 3 3

42 V V

(

BM@ 78.26m | B 77.4m ( d

n 3

U 8 1

671 5 671

Playground

V V

2 6

E D

a 1 r 4 d

B d y 74.4m

9 2

670 670

266900 266900

487200 873 487400

Scale 1:1250 V V 41

NATIONAL AND LOCAL PLANNING POLICY: Regional Spatial Strategy 8. Northamptonshire County Structure Plan - GS5. Borough of Wellingborough Local Plan - G1. Supplementary Planning Guidance Residential Extensions: A Guide to Good Design and Planning Out Crime. Planning Policy Statement 1; Delivering Sustainable Development.

SUMMARY OF REPLIES TO CONSULTATIONS/REPRESENTATIONS RECEIVED: 1. Neighbours – letters of objection/comment have been received from the occupiers of 49, 53 and 55 Stanwell Way who make the following comments:

• Letter previously sent giving approval for the window insertion. • Disquiet regarding the length of time being taken for the building works and the time at which the works are being carried out. • Health and safety considerations seemingly being ignored. • Noise from the site. • Building materials landing on an adjacent site. • Comment regarding the distance of the conservatory and the previous extension extend into the back garden. • Reference to previous planning history. • Belief that the applicant is attempting to manipulate planning regulations to his advantage. • Development is out of character with the area. • Loss of privacy. • Loss of light. • Conservatory will result in Tunnel effect. • Suggestion of an alternative scheme.

ASSESSMENT Material planning considerations: • Compliance with SPG • Effect on neighbours’ amenities • Crime and disorder

Compliance with SPG The application property is an extended bungalow and it is considered that the proposal which is not overly large in scale does not have any materially harmful effect on the overall appearance of the dwelling.

Effect on neighbours’ amenities Paragraph 4.1 of SPG Residential Extensions: A Guide to Good Design sets out the Council’s views concerning the acceptability of proposed extensions in relation to protecting the amenities of occupiers of surrounding buildings. With regards single storey extensions the guidance shows a notional 60° line extending from the centre point of the nearest window in the neighbouring dwelling upon which the proposed extension should not impinge.

The plans that occupancy the scheme illustrate 60° lines extended from both of the nearest windows in the next door properties and they indicate that the proposal meets the Council’s adopted method of assessing the acceptability of an extension in relation to the next door neighbour’s amenities. It should be mentioned however that the notional lines do not in themselves represent the only criterion upon which an application should be judged in regards to neighbours amenities but it is considered that the other material factors of the case indicate that the possible detrimental effects are insufficient for the proposal to be recommended for refusal for the following reasons:

• It is acknowledged that the length of the scheme does extend past the rear walls of nos. 49 and 53 Stanwell Way but it would not detrimentally affect the light that is currently available to the next door occupiers from the southeast in the early part of the day and the southwest in the latter part of the day due to its low height and fall in the ground level of the application site. • With regards the massing of the proposal it is accepted that it extends the existing building further down into its plot but the height to the ridge of the roof is 3.3m and to the eaves it is 2.5m and this measurement should be considered in the context of a permitted development height fence of 2m. • Both the application property and no. 53 Stanwell Way have intervening spaces between their flank walls and the common boundary. The conservatory is also set in from the boundary with no. 49 by approximately 3.5m. The design illustrates the proposed conservatory being set in from the corners of the rear elevation of the building which lessens its effect on the adjacent occupiers.

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

RECOMMENDATION: Approve.

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. Borough of Wellingborough Local Plan - G1. Supplementary Planning Guidance Residential Extensions: A Guide to Good Design and Planning Out Crime. Planning Policy Statement 1; Delivering Sustainable Development. 2. The applicant is advised that this decision relates to the following drawing numbers received on the date shown: 9th October 2006 43

BOROUGH COUNCIL OF WELLINGBOROUGH AGENDA ITEM

Regulatory Committee 03/01/2007

Report of the Executive Director

APPLICATION REF: WP/2006/0607/O

PROPOSAL: Outline application for two bed detached bungalow on land adjacent to no. 67 - amended plan.

LOCATION: 67 Harvey Road, Wellingborough.

APPLICANT: Mr S Egan.

This application is referred to Regulatory Committee for determination due to the level of neighbour representation.

PROPOSAL AND DESCRIPTION OF SITE: As described above.

The application site is in part the relatively large side amenity area of a semi-detached bungalow that is laid to tarmac and gravel and is occupied by a flat roofed detached garage. The lesser part of the site is currently the back garden area of nos. 65 and 67 Harvey Road. The ground level in the area generally falls from the northwest down to the southeast which has resulted in a difference in ground levels on the boundary with no. 69 to the southeast of approximately 0.5m.

The surrounding housing development is predominantly semi-detached bungalows, some of which have minimal amounts of rear amenity space.

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY: None since construction

NATIONAL AND LOCAL PLANNING POLICY: Regional Spatial Strategy 8. Northamptonshire County Structure Plan - GS5, H1, H2 and H6. Borough of Wellingborough Local Plan - G1, 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. B 73.2m

D A O R

267400 6 267400

6 H

6 A

9 R 7 3 V E Y R O

A 1

D 5

7 1

2 34a

5 9

b 4 3

4 3

36 673 673

9 4

Charles Robinson Court 1 7 H

A 8 7 7 R

V 46 E 7 Y 1 R OA D G I LL IT TS R

0 A

2 D

8 5

65.2m 83 @

B 9 6

7 El Sub Sta

2 3

2 0 1

672 672 Post

4 (

0 0 1 7

1 2

BM 5 60.75m @ 118 (

O 1

3 R 5

AW 4 H

4 NS

( HE 1 2

TCB 3

59.1m

4 B 3 3

1 1 4 5

8 4

1 1

Hearnden Court 267100 D 267100

488100 488300

(

9 882 9

Post

3 D

Scale 1:1250

9 8

t D

o D

6 D 3 D 44

Planning Policy Statement 23; Annex 2: Development on Land Affected by Contamination.

SUMMARY OF REPLIES TO CONSULTATIONS/REPRESENTATIONS RECEIVED: 1. NCC Highways – does not object but makes reference to the need for access and parking/manoeuvring details to be submitted and approved before development commences.

2. Neighbours – letter of concern received from the occupiers of 48 Harvey Road who make reference to the following:

• Location of drive being opposite an existing access could cause highway safety issues when drivers reverse out of their drives. • Reference to parking provision for existing residents. • Query regarding parking and access issues involving construction vehicles. • Increase in fast traffic due to construction of speed ramps in Henshaw Road.

Objections have been received from the occupiers of 63 and 69 Harvey Road and the writers give the following reasons for opposing the scheme:

• Development would make adjoining back garden feel too enclosed. • Identification of sloping land and opinion that a development, even of the same size as the adjacent bungalow, will deprive the resident of light to a bedroom and kitchen. • Loss of security because new house will make it easier for unauthorised access down the adjacent driveway into the next door back garden. • Request that there is no further development upwards of the house. • Reference to the outline nature of the application with its commensurate lack of detail. • Reference to future parking of car, hot dog van, lorry and trailer • Loss of view.

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

Compliance with policy The proposal site is 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. Other aspects of the proposal will be examined below.

Effect on neighbours’ amenities It is accepted that the amenity the surrounding occupiers could be affected by the proposal but it is considered that the potential amenity loss will not be sufficient to withhold the granting of planning permissions for the following reasons:

• No undue loss of light due to the modest size of the proposed single storey building, despite the difference in ground levels. • No material loss of privacy also due to the single storey nature of the proposal. • Imposition of a condition that requires any approval of reserved matters to be for a single storey building only. • It is recommended that permitted development rights for extensions and erection of buildings in the garden area are removed to ensure an example standard of amenity for adjacent residential occupiers.

Effect on visual amenity The proposed layout of the scheme is sympathetic to the scale and design of the surrounding development and it is considered that any application at the reserved matters stage can be agreed which will result in no material harm occurring to the visual amenity of the street scene. The conditioned use of exterior facing materials and removal of all permitted development rights will also ensure the pleasant appearance of the building in the future.

Parking The proposed layout has sufficient space for the parking of two vehicles off the road, but no parking is shown for the existing dwelling. Nevertheless, there is adequate space within the residual plot for adequate car parking spaces which can be controlled by the imposition of an appropriate condition.

Crime and disorder Comment has been drawn from a resident who considers that security to the writer’s property will be compromised. The existing boundary treatment between the application site and the objector currently consist of a 1m high lattice fence which has little security value and it is considered that the proposed dwelling with its own security fencing will in fact enhance the security for the adjacent site.

Non material considerations • Loss of view • Variety of parked vehicles on the existing driveway

RECOMMENDATION: Approve subject to 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 46

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 layout, scale, external appearance and the means of access thereto, 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. The hereby approved development shall be single storey only. 4. Before development commences the finished floor level of the hereby approved single storey dwelling in relation to the ground levels of the existing site shall be submitted to the local planning authority. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details. 5. Notwithstanding the provisions of The Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995, or any Order revoking or re-enacting that Order the hereby approved single storey dwelling shall not be extended without the express planning permission of the local planning authority. 6. Notwithstanding the provisions of The Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995, or any Order revoking or re-enacting that Order no buildings shall be erected in the rear amenity area without the express planning permission of the local planning authority. 7. Before development commences a scheme for off road parking for no. 67 Harvey Road shall be submitted to the local planning authority and approved in writing. The approved scheme shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the local planning authority before the hereby approved development 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. 3. In the interests of visual amenity and to protect the amenities of adjacent residential occupiers. 4. To protect the amenities of adjacent residential occupiers. 5. In the interests of protecting the amenity of adjoining residential occupiers and to prevent overdevelopment of the site. 6. To prevent overdevelopment of the site and to protect the amenity of adjoining residential occupiers. 7. In the interests of ensuring that no. 67 Harvey Road has adequate off road parking provision.

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, H1, H2 and H6 Borough of Wellingborough Local Plan - G1, H1, UH1 and UH5 Supplementary Planning Guidance - Parking, Building Better Places and Planning Out Crime 47

Planning Policy Statement 1; Delivering Sustainable Development Planning Policy Guidance 3; Housing Planning Policy Guidance 13; Transport Planning Policy Statement 23; Annex 2: Development on Land Affected by Contamination. 2. The applicant is advised that this decision relates to the following drawing numbers received on the date shown: 10th November 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. 48

BOROUGH COUNCIL OF WELLINGBOROUGH AGENDA ITEM

Regulatory Committee 03/01/2007

Report of the Executive Director

APPLICATION REF: WP/2006/0630/F

PROPOSAL: 6 no. apartments and 3 no. 3-bedroom houses.

LOCATION: Community Centre Site, Spencer Road, Wellingborough.

APPLICANT: Taylor Woodrow Developments.

PROPOSAL AND DESCRIPTION OF SITE: (As above). The proposal is to undertake a residential development scheme on part of what is currently an open grassed amenity area at the southern end of the large new residential development estate still under construction (although the area around the application site has been completed) to the east of Doddington Road and north of Turnells Mill Lane, which itself is adjacent to the A45. The area of the application site was reserved in the first instance for the construction of a Community Facility. When planning permission was granted for the development of the estate in 2001, it was subject to a S106 legal agreement. The latter made provision for the area of land, which is the subject of this planning application, to be reserved for the construction of a Community Facility to meet social, leisure, arts and sporting needs, consisting of a main hall, an auxiliary hall/meeting room, kitchen, WC’s and storage facilities. The construction of the building was to be financed by a financial contribution of £350,000 made by the developer. This sum of money has now been paid by the developer to the Borough Council. The legal agreement made provision for the site of the Community Facility to be conveyed to the Borough Council at a nominal (peppercorn) consideration of £1.

Subsequently the Borough Council determined that it no longer wished the Community Facility to be constructed on this site, preferring instead for it to be sited elsewhere in the locality but not on the residential estate. The S106 legal agreement includes clauses within it that cover for this eventuality. It states that if the Community Facility has not been constructed within a period of 5 years from the date of transfer to the Borough, then all of the Community Site shall be transferred back to the Owner at a nominal consideration of £1. Furthermore, it is stated in the S106 legal agreement, that the Owner may seek planning permission for such development on the Community site as it shall deem appropriate.

In fact the developers never transferred the site in the first instance and therefore are now making the present application (in line with the clause that ‘the Owner may seek planning permission for such development as it shall deem appropriate’) given that it 11 8 E OS CL KE

6 A

489000 489200 W 2

lk 2

266300 0 E 266300

IV 3 R D

1 1 4 2 CH O .R

t o

1 7 0

11 15

7 1

1 6 0

1 8

1 T

1 64.3m

1 2 9

1 9 t o 2 9 E B

N 2 4 4 1 E AV E 16 C IL 7 W

4 ESS 1 D 10 A

662 O 662

2 2

R o

2 1 2 R 6 E C 28 N E P S

36 SP EN 30 CE R RO

8 3

5 4

4 2 68

5 2 4

6 D

661 661

NE LA ILL M

LS 1 L 2 K AR S P ER LL MI

6 0

M I L L E 5 R S

P 1 1 A R

9 2

8 9

1 3

266000RK 266000 PA S 489000 489200 R 2 LE 891 0

IL 34

M 0

Scale 1:1250 8 2

RK 2

A 1

P 3 S 9 8 ER 3 LL

2 4 49

has been determined that the Community Facility is no longer needed at this particular location. In addition, the developers have stated that as they still own the Community Facility land they are not paying the Borough Council a price for the land as such, but are paying the Borough Council £275,000 for releasing them from the S106 obligation to transfer the land to them. Therefore they will always own the land.

The proposal is for a 3 storey high pitched and gabled roof apartment block (6 flats) with its rear elevation facing Turnells Mill Lane. Set alongside the latter, is a detached rectangular pitched roof 2 storey dwelling 3 bedroom dwelling with a detached single garage and with its front elevation facing an existing car parking area beyond the present head of Spencer Road. Both of these buildings have a garden/amenity area extending to the boundary with Turnells Mill Lane. Beyond these 2 buildings to the north there is an area of car parking/shared access and at the northern end of the site are 2 further 3 bedroom gabled pitched roof 3 bedroom detached dwellings with detached but linked single garages. The design of the buildings is of a plain semi local vernacular nature with relatively small almost cottage like small window pane fenestration.

This application is referred to Regulatory Committee due to the number of objections received and because a new S106 legal agreement is required. . RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY: BW/95/0398C Redevelopment for residential use open space & new access WP/98/0314 (O) Residential development WP/02/0777/RM Residential development WP/0278/RM Residential development

NATIONAL AND LOCAL PLANNING POLICY: Borough of Wellingborough Local Plan Policies: G1, H1, H5, H8, L7, and T9. Borough of Wellingborough Local Plan First Alteration Policies UH2 and UH5. Northamptonshire Structure Plan Policies: GS2, GS3, GS4, GS5, GS6, H2, H6, T3, T10 & RT2. SPG VIII: Building Better Places. Supplementary Planning Guidance - Parking, Building Better Places and Planning Out Crime. Planning Policy Statement 1; Delivering Sustainable Development. Planning Policy Statement 3; Housing.

SUMMARY OF REPLIES TO CONSULTATIONS/REPRESENTATIONS RECEIVED: 1. County Highway Authority – recommends standard conditions relating to the provision of access points.

2. Wellingborough Borough Council Growth and Development Manager – no comments or observations in connection with this application.

3. Wellingborough Borough Council Cultural Development Manager – as this area of land forms a small part of a larger residential development, I have no request for a further contribution towards play facilities. Negotiations have been concluded regarding a further community facilities contribution, in lieu of the site being no longer used for this purpose.

4. Wellingborough Borough Council Housing Strategy Manager - the site is adjacent to homes provided by Spire Homes. The area currently benefits from an open space which is enjoyed by the community and to see part of the land developed, in my opinion, would detract from the green, open feel the area currently provides. If the site is developed, it would be beneficial to see a mixed tenure development although this would not be a policy requirement as the density of 9 units would not trigger an obligation to provide affordable units.

5. Third Parties – objections have been received from 5 local residents including a petition against the proposal containing 135 signatures. The grounds of objection are: (i) limited open space on the estate; (ii) noise and disruption during construction work; (iii) the development is built to a high density; (iv) the developers are seeking to exploit the situation and profit from it; (v) loss of property value; (vi) children need space to play on open and safe areas; and (vii) extra housing will lead to extra traffic and there is inadequate car parking provision on the estate.

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) Responding to points made in consultation responses, (iii) Design considerations. (iv) Residential amenity (v) Responding to third party representations

(i) In terms of present planning policy considerations, the proposal relates to the development of an area of land within a residential estate where the principle for development had already been established albeit for built community rather than residential use. Whilst the site in question had appeared on an earlier indicative plan for the development of the estate, as open space this was not confirmed in approval of the details given that it was identified as the area where the Community Facility would be built. The remaining land adjacent will remain as open space. 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 proposal is considered to be in accord with specific elements of Government guidance and development plan policy in regard to directing new housing development to sites within the urban areas. On this basis the site is suitable in planning policy terms for residential development.

(ii) Standard conditions can be imposed to meet the requirement stipulated by the County Highway Authority. Mixed tenure cannot be insisted upon in relation to this proposal and in any event a mixture of apartments and dwellings is proposed.

(iii) The design of scheme is fairly plain but entirely in keeping with that of the estate as a whole.

(iv) Whilst there is clearly likely to be some impact upon the residential amenities of the occupiers of neighbouring properties this is not considered to be of such magnitude that refusal of the proposals is justified. Residential development standards are met and there are sufficient separation distances in relation to the need to minimise overlooking.

(v) Whilst the preference of local neighbouring residents for the area to remain as an open space is understood, there cannot be any objection in principle in terms of planning policy (for the reasons set out in (i) above) and therefore there is not any justifiable and overriding reason to refuse planning permission so that the area can be retained as open space. With the development of the site there will still remain sufficient open space on the estate. The County Highway Authority has not raised objections on the grounds of traffic generation/lack of car parking on the estate. Possible disruption during construction is not a reason to resist the proposal. Loss of property value is not a material planning consideration.

In conclusion, the proposed development is therefore considered to accord with development plan policy. The construction of a 3 storey apartment building and 3 three bedroom houses on this site is considered appropriate since much of the development within the surrounding area is of this nature.

RECOMMENDATION: That the issue of planning permission be delegated to the Proper Officer subject to the prior signing of a new Section 106 legal agreement relating the promised contribution from the developer of £275,000, in lieu of transferring the area of land (which is the subject of this planning application) to provide for the building of a Community Facility, 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. 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. 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. 4. 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. 5. Before development is commenced an Environmental Risk Assessment (ERA) to assess the potential for contamination of the site shall be submitted to the local planning authority. Should the ERA reveal that the site is subject to contamination a scheme for its remediation shall be submitted to the local planning authority and approved in writing. The approved remediation scheme shall be implemented and completed to the satisfaction of the local planning authority before the dwellings are first occupied.

6. Before development is commenced the finished floor levels of the hereby approved dwellings in relation to the adjacent properties shall be submitted to the local planning authority and approved in writing. 7. The shared private drive to the apartments must be 4.5m wide for a distance of 10m from the highway boundary and to prevent loose material being carried onto the highway at least the first 5m of the driveways must be hard paved. All works within the prospectively adopted highway must be carried out in accordance with the specification of Northamptonshire County Council so as not to prejudice highway adoption. 8. To provide pedestrian to vehicle visibility, splays of 2.5m x 2.5m (2m x 2m where turning facilities are provided within the site) must be provided and maintained on both sides of the point of the access. 9. Before the development commences a scheme for refuse collection shall be submitted in writing and approved by 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 residential amenity. 3. In the interests of amenity. 4. In the interests of amenity and privacy. 5. In the interests of assessing any potential contamination of the site and to implement the necessary remediation measures. 6. In the interests of residential amenity. 7. In the interests of highway safety. 8. In the interests of highway safety. 9. In the interests of amenity.

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: GS2, GS3, GS4, GS5, GS6, H2, H6, T3, T10 and RT2 of the County Structure Plan and Borough of Wellingborough Local Plan Policies: G1, H1, H5, H8, L7 and T9. 2. The applicant is advised that this decision relates to the following drawing numbers received on the date shown: Drawing Number: Date Received: 11514/Plan/02; PO5KIN/-/20/20A/32; P GS1 and GS2/05U/20, SK-6KR-30/001-00; SK-6KR-20/001-01; SK-6AK/3DE/25/26/27/32/33 17/10/2006 3. The applicant should ensure that refuse collection arrangements of the proposal be discussed with the appropriate officer of the Borough Council.

BOROUGH COUNCIL OF WELLINGBOROUGH AGENDA ITEM

Regulatory Committee 03/01/2007

Report of the Executive Director

APPLICATION REF: WP/2006/0637/RM

PROPOSAL: Construction of 4 no. terraced houses - amended plan.

LOCATION: Land adjacent 107 Valley Road, Wellingborough.

APPLICANT: Mr Andrew Howard, Bassetform Limited.

This application is referred to the Regulatory Committee for determination due to the number of objection letters received from local residents.

PROPOSAL AND DESCRIPTION OF SITE: As described, the density of the proposed development is 66 dwellings per hectare. An amended plan has been received on 15th November 2006.

The site is currently a vacant corner plot situated on the corner of a spur road. The site seems to have been cleared relatively recently and laid to grass. The dwellings nearby were originally developed as social housing and are exclusively modestly proportioned semi-detached houses and bungalows. At the rear of the site is a watercourse with embankments and an elevated section of the Doddington Road is 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: WP/2006/0240/O Outline application for residential development – approved with conditions.

NATIONAL 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 (SPG) – 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.

6 4

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

6 A

Borough CouncilO Of Wellingborough: Licence No.100018694. Published 13/12/2006

8 1

1 4 D 889 5

266300 B 58.5m 3 266300 7 D

9 4

D 11 15

O 0

D 6

D I N

G Y OHN LEA WA T J

1 N 8

1 4 D R

A 1 2

1 7 3 16

D 4

662 662

D 2 2 2

A 28

E 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 54

SUMMARY OF REPLIES TO CONSULTATIONS/REPRESENTATIONS RECEIVED: 1. NCC Highways – has no objection but makes comments regarding specifications and loose materials etc.

2. Environment Agency – no objection but makes informative comments for the applicant’s attention.

3. Councils Conservation and Design Officer – I feel this proposal is objectionable on the following counts:

i) The plot ratio is too high. This has resulted in an overdevelopment of the site in relation to the existing surrounding development.

ii) Specifically, the building line is not respected and the proposed units are some 5 metres deeper than the existing style in the neighbourhood.

iii) Again, the units are too tall as a result of the third storey.

Current Government guidance through Commission for Architecture and the Built Environment is that the new development should not only respect but actually enhance existing townscape. I regret that this scheme does neither and ought therefore to be refused.

4. Neighbours – letters of objection have been received from the occupiers of 78, 80, 82, 84, 86 and 88 Valley Road who cite the following reasons for opposing the scheme:

• Proposed development is out of character with surrounding houses. • Lack of off road parking provision which would lead to potential for danger to highway safety, particularly as the site is on a main bus route. • Loss of light. • Loss of view. • Opinion that there is no need for the houses. • Question posed regarding the need for more housing with other major developments in the town. • Site is an amenity because it is an area of grass on which local children play. • Statement that the Council has assured residents on several occasions that the site would not be developed due to main services and drainage systems that lie under the site. • Reference to previous planning history.

ASSESSMENT: The material planning considerations are: • Compliance with policy • Effect o neighbours amenities • Effect on visual amenity • Parking and highway safety • Crime and disorder 55

Compliance with policy The proposal site is situated within the built up area of a town and it carried 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 development plan policies that direct new housing development to sites within urban areas, other issues are however discussed below.

Effect on neighbours’ amenities The comments of the nearby neighbours are noted but it is considered that the proposed development may not be overly harmful in relation to loss of privacy for the following reasons:

• Normal arrangement of bedroom windows in the rear elevation at second storey level and the fact that the building is set further back in its plot by approximately 3.5m from the rear wall of no. 107. • The pitched roofs of the dormer windows act as screens for the bedrooms in the third storey and prevent harmful downward sideways overlooking.

The set back in the plot mentioned above will however have an effect on the standard of other amenities that the nearby occupiers currently enjoy. The height and set back will result in a harmful massing effect that will result in a depressing outlook for the occupiers of no. 107 Valley Road who, despite the intervening distance to the flank wall of the block, will have an unmitigated mass of brickwork facing them. The height of the intended ridge is noticeably higher than the surrounding development to facilitate habitable accommodation in the roof space, but again the set back in the rear wall will also have the consequence of depriving the residents to the north of a significant proportion of their direct sunlight over the above what would be expected with a more modestly sized building that ‘lines up’ with the rear elevation of the adjacent dwellinghouse.

The proposal is therefore considered to be contrary to Policies G1.2 and UH5.5 of the Borough of Wellingborough Local Plan and the provisions of the adopted Supplementary Planning Guidance ‘Building Better Places’.

Effect on visual amenity The effect on the visual amenity of the street scene will be significant because the proposal site is highly visible to the public gaze from the rear as well as the front due to the elevated situation of Doddington Road. The comments of the Council’s Design and Conservation Officer could not be clearer regarding his opinion of the merits of the design and its effect on the visual amenity of the area. The need for good design is further expounded by Government advice contained in the very recently released Planning Policy Statement 3; Housing; which again re-iterates the need for proposals to display good design, have a sense of place and are appropriate in the surrounding built form that is embraced in PPG3. Although the guidance contained in PPS3 does not come into effect until 1st April 2007, it does go on to say however that in the meantime its contents can be a material consideration prior to this date.

The proposal is therefore considered to be contrary to Policy GS5 of the County Structure Plan and Policies G1.1 and UH5.2 of the Borough of Wellingborough Local 56

Plan together with the provisions of the adopted Supplementary Planning Guidance ‘Building Better Places’.

Parking and highway safety With regards to parking the adopted SPG, Parking, advises that an upper threshold of 1.5 spaces overall should be applied to new residential development, but there could be exceptional circumstances e.g. where the site is a remote rural location, where there is amenity implications that cannot be resolved by controls or enforcement or where public transport is limited. The SPG does go on to say however that these instances should be justified on an individual basis. The layout plan that accompanies the application illustrates 4 no. off road spaces which is considered to be acceptable for the development for the following reasons:

• Local residents have identified the existence of a main bus route that passes along Valley Road which will afford prospective residents an alternative method of transport to the motor car to access the facilities of the town. • An increased number of car parking spaces shown to the front of the proposed dwellings will create a car dominated environment that will be harmful to the visual amenity of the street scene. • An increased area of footpath crossover will result in the potential for danger to pedestrians who would have to negotiate a footway that was capable of being crossed by up to 7 or 8 vehicles. • There is on street parking provision available on the spur road that borders the application site to the south. • An expanse of car parking would blur the distinction between private and public space and unauthorized persons in the front of the dwellings would be difficult to identify. • Guidance in PPG3 states that developers should not be required to provide more off road car parking than they want to.

Crime and disorder Apart from the car parking issue mentioned above it is considered that there are no other relevant crime and disorder issues relating to this application.

None material consideration Loss of view.

RECOMMENDATION: Disapproval of reserved matters for being contrary to the following development plan policies. • GS5 of the County Structure Plan. • G1.1, G1.2, UH5.2 and UH5.5 of the Borough of Wellingborough Local Plan.

The proposal is also considered to be contrary to the provisions of the adopted Supplementary Planning Guidance ‘Building Better Places’.

1. The proposal by way of its mass, size and design is considered to be contrary to following development plan policies: GS5 of the County Structure Plan and 57

policies G1.1, G1.2, UH5.2 and UH5.5 of the Borough of Wellingborough Local Plan together with the provisions of the adopted Supplementary Planning Guidance 'Building Better Places'.

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.

POLICY GS5

IN ORDER TO PROMOTE HIGH QUALITY DESIGN AND SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT, ALL PROPOSALS WILL HAVE REGARD TO THE FOLLOWING CONSIDERATIONS:

- THE VISUAL APPEARANCE OF THE DEVELOPMENT IN THE CONTEXT OF THE DEFINING CHARACTERISTICS OF THE LOCAL AREA;

- THE NEED TO ENCOURAGE MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENT AND THE RELATIONSHIPS OF DIFFERENT LAND-USE WITH EACH OTHER;

- THE NEED FOR MEASURES FOR PLANNING OUT CRIME; AND

- THE NEED FOR CONSERVATION OF ENERGY, RESOURCES AND THE NATURAL ENVIRONMENT, AND FOR DEVELOPMENTS AND DESIGNS WHICH GIVE PRIORITY TO MEANS OF TRANSPORT OTHER THAN THE PRIVATE CAR.

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;

5. THE NEED TO AVOID UNNEIGHBOURLY STANDARDS OF AMENITY IN DESIGN AND LAYOUT. 58

BOROUGH COUNCIL OF WELLINGBOROUGH AGENDA ITEM

Regulatory Committee 03/01/2007

Report of the Executive Director

APPLICATION REF: WP/2006/0653/F

PROPOSAL: Detached four bed dwelling and detached double garage with one bed annex above.

LOCATION: The Bungalow, 31 Furnace Lane, Little Harrowden, Wellingborough.

APPLICANT: Mr Paul O'Sullivan.

This application is subject to the Regulatory Committee due to more than three third party objections being received.

PROPOSAL AND DESCRIPTION OF SITE: The site which is located within the open countryside was formerly occupied by a derelict dwelling and outbuildings which have since been demolished. The site is a large plot measuring approximately 32m x 55m. Access to the site is provided off Furnace Lane. A row of terraced properties is found to the east of the site with the nearest dwelling being approximately 90 metres from the site boundary. A small industrial estate, Finedon Sidings, is found further to the east beyond the residential properties. Trees and hedgerow run along the highway boundary. This extends along part of the frontage of the site. Some trees run along the side and rear boundaries of the site. This application seeks full planning permission for a replacement dwelling (4 bed detached) with detached double garage with annex accommodation above.

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY: WP/2005/0701/F Dwelling with family annexe to replace existing dwelling and outbuildings considered to be beyond repair – approved with conditions.

WP/2006/0293/F Amendment to previously approved scheme WP/2005/0701/F, dwelling with family annex to replace existing dwelling and outbuildings considered to be beyond repair – withdrawn.

NATIONAL AND LOCAL PLANNING POLICY: G1, G6, H4, H12 and H14 of the Borough of Wellingborough Local Plan.

in Dra

Def

Borough Council Of Wellingborough: Licence No.100018694. Published 13/12/2006 V 891 892 893 V

Drain 272500 V 272500 Track

2m RV H Def 1.2

724 724

723 723

722 T 722

r a c Furnace Cottages k

The 1

Bungalow 2

1 8

3 2

721 721

720 720

271900 271900

489000 891 892 893 489400 Scale 1:2500 59

SUMMARY OF REPLIES TO CONSULTATIONS/REPRESENTATIONS RECEIVED: 1. Highways Authority – no objection on highway grounds subject to the permission enuring for the applicant only for the purposes stated on the application. Recommendations are made regarding construction of the access, gates, visibility splays and driveway. It is advised that there is no budget or programme for improvement to Furnace Lane.

2. Rights of Way Officer, Northamptonshire County Council – no objections to the application but the following comments in respect of Public Rights of Way have been made.

There is a Public Right of Way Byway TK 20 registered on the Definitive Map (2005) adjacent to the development site. The following points should be taken into account.

• 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. Environmental Protection – asbestos contamination of the land is an outstanding issue. In light of no soil tests being carried out to date it is considered that a condition requiring the investigation of site contamination, prior to the commencement of development, should be imposed.

4. Wildlife Trust – informative comments have been made and are summarised as follows:

• If there is to be any clearance of vegetation on the site, care will need to be taken both in terms of the timing of such works (to avoid the bird breeding and nesting season) and the potential for disturbance to wildlife in general. • If any large trees are to be removed - or likely to be subject of remedial works or other disturbance – then attention will need to be paid to the possible presence of bats and birds. • The site itself has a recent history of disuse and is therefore considerably overgrown with vegetation, nevertheless the precautionary principle approach should dictate that it is recommended that a suitable ecological survey (which would include an investigation for the possible presence of any protected species) is carried out and submitted prior to the determination of this application. • It is recommended that new tree and shrub planting along the north and east boundaries is provided by means of the use of native species only. Ideally these native species should be chosen as ones that are typical of that part of the county and they should only be sourced from a known and local provenance. 60

• Another way of trying to enhance biodiversity of this local part of the Borough area, and to achieve net planning gain for wildlife, would be to require the provision of artificial nesting/roosting sites for bats, birds and invertebrates.

5. Third Parties – 6 letters of objection including one from the Furnace Lane Action Group (FLAG). Grounds of objections are summarised as follows:

• Overdevelopment. The dwelling and larger than average garage will extend the site considerably. • The size of the development is not in-keeping with the existing dwellings along Furnace Lane and the open countryside. • During previous applications it was mentioned that the site should remain central. This application does not meet those recommendations. • Application is not commensurate with the original building. • The garage with annex above could be converted into a separate dwelling in the future. The site was originally occupied by one single storey dwelling. The new dwelling should be single storey. • Garage should be attached to main dwelling. The previously imposed condition stating that the annex is to remain ancillary to main dwellinghouse should be imposed on this development if granted. • Within the open countryside only one dwelling should be permitted. • Mature hedgerows should be retained. • Long-term concern regarding asbestos contamination on site. Risk to health when development commences. • Furnace Lane is an unmade byway with no lighting or footpath. The site would not be able to sustain two dwellings safely and adequately preserving the open countryside, present environment and not affecting the highway. • Proposal design is out of character with the surrounding area. • Previously approved application was more in-keeping with the area.

No other representations have been received at the time of writing this report.

ASSESSMENT: This application seeks planning permission to revise the replacement dwelling granted permission under planning reference WP/2005/0701/F.

Justification for Development within the Open Countryside The principle has been set by the previously approved application for one replacement dwelling on the site. Policy G6 permits development within the open countryside if specific criteria are satisfied. It is considered that the proposed development is in accordance with the provisions of G6 in that it proposes a limited number of buildings, i.e. one replacement dwelling and garage, and will not result in a local proliferation of new buildings or structures. The imposition of an appropriate landscaping condition will ensure that the development is suitably screened. In terms of visual impact it is considered that this development will not have a detrimental impact on the character of the area and will environmentally improve this particular site.

Policy H14 specifically refers to residential development with the open countryside. This policy permits residential development in this location providing that a number of 61

criteria are satisfied. The first test is whether the dwelling is occupied and uneconomic to repair. It was previously considered that the need for the replacement dwelling was justified due to the condition of the original dwelling which occupied the site. Since the grant of planning permission WP/2005/0701/F the original building has been demolished. Evidence submitted by the previous applicant indicated that ‘rates’ were last paid 2.5 years ago. This was considered sufficiently recent for the residential use of the dwelling not to have become abandoned. The property was therefore regarded as ‘occupied’. In such circumstances, new dwellings are allowed providing they are of a scale and floor area commensurate with the existing dwelling and they will not perpetuate an existing traffic hazard.

The proposed dwelling is set back from the highway by approximately 24 metres and is positioned towards the western side of the site. The garage is however detached from the main dwellinghouse and is positioned closer to the eastern site boundary. The overall footprint of the proposal (i.e. main dwellinghouse and garage combined) is approximately 8 square metres greater than the footprint previously approved under planning reference WP/2005/0701/F. The height of the highest point of the main dwellinghouse is approximately 9.6 metres compared with a maximum height of 8.8 metres previously found acceptable. The increase in footprint is considered to be acceptable in principle however the layout and design of the buildings also need to be considered. The approved scheme concentrated development in the centre of the site. The layout of the development as mentioned above has been revised. The dwellinghouse and garage are two separate entities and are not concentrated to the centre of the site. It is considered however that the proposed location and layout of the buildings does not detrimentally affect the character of this locality. It is accepted that the main building will be prominent on the landscape. Existing screening and new landscaping however will lessen the visual impact of the proposal. The plot is relatively large and there is adequate space for suitable boundary treatment and landscaping to be agreed. The original site was distinct in character from the neighbouring properties to the east. It is therefore considered that the proposal design enables the site to retain its individuality without having an adverse impact on the location which it occupies. Overall it is considered that the scale, layout and positioning of the proposal will not have an adverse effect on the character and appearance of the surrounding area. The environmental benefits derived from the development, for example in terms of dealing with contamination issues and reusing a site which has been unoccupied for a number years, will be significant.

Conditions are recommended to remove permitted development rights to extend the property and construct additional buildings plus to ensure that the proposed annex accommodation remains ancillary to the main dwellinghouse. It should be noted that the garage does not need to be attached to the main dwellinghouse to ensure that it remains ancillary. On the subject of a possible traffic hazard the Highway Authority does not object to the development.

Residential Amenity The nearest residential properties are approximately 90 metres to the east of the site. It is therefore considered that the development will not have an adverse impact on the amenities currently enjoyed by the occupiers of the surrounding properties. In terms of the amenity afforded to the new dwelling it is considered that adequate private amenity space is provided on site. 62

Effect on the Highway No objection has been raised by the Highway Authority. It is therefore considered that highway safety will not be prejudiced by the proposed development. An adequate level of parking accommodation is provided on site. A number of recommendations have however been made with regards visibility splays, gates, driveway and construction of the access. These recommendations will be implemented by way of conditions on the grant of planning permission.

Site Contamination Extensive concern has been raised by the occupiers of existing properties along Furnace Lane regarding the demolition of original buildings which contained asbestos. The Environmental Protection section of the Borough Council has been in liaison with the applicants and has requested that soil samples be taken and tested. To date no soil samples have been tested therefore the Environmental Protection have recommended that a suitable condition be imposed to ensure that no development can take place until investigations are carried out to determine the extent of site contamination and any mitigation measures are agreed.

Other Considerations The Wildlife Trust has made a number of informative comments and has also requested that a protected species survey be carried out. It is considered that an appropriate condition can be imposed to ensure that this is submitted and any details agreed prior to the commencement of development. A condition of this nature was imposed on the grant of planning permission WP/2005/0701/F. Landscaping details will also be required by condition. . RECOMMENDATION: Approve with conditions.

6. Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995 (or as amended) no enlargement, improvement or other alteration to the exterior of the dwellinghouse (including the insertion of additional windows) shall be undertaken at any time without the prior express permission in writing of the local planning authority. 7. The vehicular access shall be constructed in accordance with the specification of Northamptonshire County Council. 8. Pedestrian to vehicle visibility splays of 2m x 2m shall be provided on each side of the point of access. 9. Any gates at the point of access shall be set back at least 5m from the highway boundary. 10. At least the first 5m of the driveway shall be hard paved. 11. No trees or hedgerow within the site shall be removed without the express written permission of the local planning authority. 12. 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. 13. Details of boundary treatment shall be submitted to and agreed by the local planning authority. The agreed details shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the local planning authority. 14. A protected species survey shall be carried out and any recommended mitigation measures carried out prior to the commencement of the development and during construction works to the satisfaction 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 avoid any detrimental effects from contamination. 4. To ensure that the annexe remains at all times in residential use dependent on the existing use of the existing dwelling the whole being and continuing to be in the same curtilage and a single planning unit. 5. In the interests of amenity. 6. In the interests of amenity. 7. In the interests of the safety and convenience of users of the adjoining highway/s. 8. In the interests of the safety and convenience of users of the adjoining highway/s. 9. In the interests of the safety and convenience of users of the adjoining highway/s. 10. In the interests of the safety and convenience of users of the adjoining highway/s. 11. In the interests of amenity. 64

12. In the interests of visual amenity. 13. In the interests of amenity. 14. To ensure that the development does not harm a protected species.

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 policies: G1, G6, H4, H12 and H14 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 1:2500 Location Plan 1:1250 Site Plan Proposed Dwellinghouse Floor Plans Proposed Dwellinghouse North Elevation Proposed Dwellinghouse South Elevation Proposed Dwellinghouse East Elevation Proposed Dwellinghouse West Elevation Proposed Garage Floor Plans Proposed Garage Elevations 25/10/2006 3. The following informative comments in respect of Public Rights of Way have been made. There is a Public Right of Way Byway TK 20 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 the Rights of Way Office, Northamptonshire County Council. 4. The applicant is advised that informative comments have been made by the Wildlife Trust in relation to this application. A copy of the Wildlife Trust letter, dated 21st November 2006, is attached for the attention of the applicant. 65

BOROUGH COUNCIL OF WELLINGBOROUGH AGENDA ITEM

Regulatory Committee 03/01/2007

Report of the Executive Director

APPLICATION REF: WP/2006/0654/F

PROPOSAL: Development of a telecommunications base station comprising a 17.5 metre high timber clad monopole with associated equipment cabinets and compound secured by a 1.2 metre stock proof fence.

LOCATION: South Field, Knuston High Farm, Station Road, Irchester, Wellingborough.

APPLICANT: O2 (UK) Limited.

This application is subject to the Regulatory Committee due to three third party objections being received.

PROPOSAL AND DESCRIPTION OF SITE: The site is positioned within the open countryside adjacent to the boundary with Bedford Borough. The nearest residential properties are however those situated within Sylmond Gardens and Lyneford Way which are part of Rushden, East Northamptonshire. There will be approximately a minimum distance of 430 metres between the boundaries of the nearest properties and the proposed installation. The application site is found to the south of Knuston High Farm.

This application seeks planning permission for a telecommunications base station comprising a 17.5 metre high timber clad monopole with associated equipment cabinets and compound secured by a 1.2 metre stock proof fence.

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY: WP/2006/0369/F Telecommunications base station comprising a 20 metre high mini macro macrocell column, 6 antennas, 2 equipment cabinets, electrical meter cabinet and ancillary development – pending.

Although the above application is still pending the agents are intending to withdraw this proposal. The current application constitutes a revised scheme with a 17.5 metre timber clad monopole proposed at a location further from the residents of Sylmond Gardens in comparison to the previous proposal.

1 a 9

th 9

( A

u B 1 m 2 ) B O T

T S

S R 2 0 A 5 I

V R 1

A F V D 2 K e Y Whitefriars County

f C

P 8 1

8 a 1 A Primary School

th 4 L (u m B )

5 8

V 1 6 9 9 1

V 9 V

5 0

5 2

4 1 V

3 W 1 0 1

1 H 4

D 1 I

1 T 7

e a 2 W

8 2 V E f 2 C

A 1 F B 1 R Whitefriars

B LB 3 I

O ( A

( 1 R 21 County Primary T 5

T TCB S 4 S School D W A C Y F

494100 V V 494900 2 4 0 1 1 V

W F C

9 R

WP/2006/0654/F 1

A 1 The

Home VN V C

Spinney 1 LO E

4 V D

2 5 I

0 S 0 R 2 2 A

V E R Y

Borough Council Of Wellingborough: Licence No.100018694. Published 13/12/2006 T 3

D O 1 N 0 8 N C O L V O T S F 2 E

P C 8 H

a 1 7

7 th 0 G ( 2 U u y

m 9 d

O 2 6 B ) 1 D B E V 5 1 1

30 V 90

3 942 943 944 945 946 9471 948 F 1

R 0

0 IN 1 D T R O A Y

N T

C 3 O

1 G 9

S 6 0 N R 2

7 IA L R C

6 FR O L K A O

C B S N S A 6

BL E E G E

N 2

3 1 E 3 E 1 C W 8 D R 13 6 V

V A 7 IC

5 T Y

C 1 265900 V V 265900 LO

S E 1 F

5 V 4

V 1

0 Post

4 3

P V (

W 4 5 8

V 1 1 R F

5 5 U V I n CH d 1 O 7

V 6 V R CF IVE | S R

V 2 5 D

1 V 2 M 1

( C A st

H 9 F V N 2 Po L V R

C O FA

1 . 1 | 2 S 2 ( m E 1 R ( 4 H 2 ( 1

| 7

V 0

1 79

7 1

4 2 1 6 4 1

1 1

7 1

2 1

3 9

in 3 9

ra 2

D B V 7 A 15 LH

7 M 7

C 1

21 L 4 1 O

4 E

3 PO

3 0

658 r 658 a

in 7

6 LB ( T 1 ra

6 1

1 3 3 6

1 D 2

f 8

V 2 V 48

1 1 El The Viking B Sub Sta W IL (PH) S 1 y 5

m D

O 9 4

i 1 1 n N 6 4

g C 1 1 to L n O S S

p E 8

in 7 3

n 5

Ve 1

y 4 1

4 7

2 2

9 1 3 9 1

1 2

C 3 P 6 a n

Knuston F E 5

D 8 A

B 3

| High d I 2 R 1 y F M

( A Farm 9 R E N A

H D

0 5 A C M R

2 E D 3 S 3 7 R C 4 IV E 657 E 657 N T 3 5 Pond

1 1

.2 8 2 1 m R H

3 9

4 4

L 6 Y N E F O R D 6 W 2

A 2

1 Y 6

3 5

7 5

5 1

2 0

6 3

5 |

1 1

(

656 5 656

1 2 V 7

6 2 7 0

T r a c k

2 FA

RNHAM

2 8

4 7

8 7

V 1

in ra 1 D 0

e f k ac Tr S Y

LMO 2

3 N 3 DGA R 11 DE NS 15

V 17

1.22 4

m RH 8

655 655 4

6 5

EE R ain & C Dr o C on st B dy 1.2 k 2m

ac RH

Tr V

0 5

| r

ack 8 5

(

D V V 654 654

T r a c k

nst Bdy Co Co EER &

ck Tra

RH 2m 1.2

653 653

dy onst B & Co C EER RH 1.22m 652 652

Pa th ( um)

V 651 651 V

650 650

The Old Pumping House

P a t h GREEN L ANE ( u m )

649 649 ck Tra

Pit (disused) MP 61.75 Pond FB

( Pond Y

MP 61.75 H ( 648 648 Y

( Y Issues

SP (

264700 264700

MP 61.5 494100 494900 942 943 944 945 946 947( 948 Pond Scale 1:5000

MP 61.5

(

Y 66

NATIONAL AND LOCAL PLANNING POLICY: T12 and G6 of the Borough of Wellingborough Local Plan.

SUMMARY OF REPLIES TO CONSULTATIONS/REPRESENTATIONS RECEIVED: 1. Rushden Town Council – no objections.

2. Irchester Parish Council – no objections as the equipment has now been moved further away from residential property.

3. East Northamptonshire Council – no objections.

4. Conservation Officer, Borough of Wellingborough – no comments.

5. Third Parties – three objections have been received. Grounds of objection are as follows:

• Health risks. • Detrimental impact on environment and visual amenity. • Interference with home communications.

No other representations have been received at the time of writing this report.

ASSESSMENT: The proposed base station is required primarily to provide second generation (2G) capacity offload to the south of Rushden as the existing O2 site 8239 has been identified as ‘over capacity’ causing customer calls to be blocked or dropped. The installation will also improve coverage levels to a stretch of the mainline railway. The installation will be designed in such a way as to allow for future upgrade to provide third generation (3G) mobiles services to the residential areas and the mainline railway line. Policies G6 and T12 of the Borough of Wellingborough Local Plan and the representations received will be taken into consideration in the determination of this planning application. T12 relates to telecommunications development whilst G6 concerns development generally within open countryside locations.

Policy T12 of the local plan and Planning Policy Guidance Note (PPG) 8, national planning guidance regarding telecommunications development, advocate a sequential approach to site selection. In the first instance site sharing should be considered in order to minimise the proliferation of base stations. If no such opportunities are available and no other structures can house the proposed equipment greenfield sites will then be considered. The applicant has considered a number of alternative sites within the search area. Many of these have been discounted for technical reasons, as they would not be capable of providing the necessary coverage, whilst others have been discounted for predominantly visual amenity reasons. In this case it is considered that no opportunities for site sharing exist within the search area which would provide the coverage required. A greenfield site is therefore considered to be needed.

Although the site benefits from less screening than the previously proposed site, it is considered that relocation of the proposed installation away from residential properties will reduce the visual impact of the proposal. On balance it is considered that the proposed site location is acceptable for telecommunications development. With regards 67

the design of the mast a slimline structure has been chosen with timber cladding in order to give the structure a natural appearance and to ensure that it will not appear prominent or obtrusive in the landscape. It is considered that the proposal design is acceptable. A condition is however recommended to ensure that the colour of the structure is agreed with the local planning authority prior to the commencement of development. Overall the local planning authority is satisfied that there are no alternative locations for this development and that a location has been chosen which minimises visual intrusion.

With regards health concerns in particular PPG 8 regarding telecommunications states the following:

“…….it is the Governments firm view that the planning system is not the place for determining health safeguards. It remains central Governments responsibility to decide what measures are necessary to protect public health. In the Governments view, if a proposed mobile phone base station meets the ICNIRP guidelines for public exposure it should not be necessary for a local planning authority, in processing an application for planning permission or prior approval, to consider further the health aspects and concerns about them.”

The applicant has submitted a declaration of conformity with ICNIRP with this application. It is therefore considered that an objection on health grounds is not sustainable. Overall it is considered that the application is in accordance with Policies T12 and G6 of the local plan and there are no other material planning considerations which would constitute sustainable grounds 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. Prior to the commencement of development the colour of the hereby approved mast shall be approved in writing by the local planning authority and implemented to the satisfaction 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 visual amenity.

2. The applicant is advised that this decision relates to the following drawing numbers received on the date shown: Drawing Number: Date Received: P/37245E/001/A P/37245E/002/A P/37245E/003/A 25/10/2006 69

BOROUGH COUNCIL OF WELLINGBOROUGH AGENDA ITEM

Regulatory Committee 03/01/2007

Report of the Executive Director

APPLICATION REF: WP/2006/0688/F

PROPOSAL: Providing pitched roof to bungalow to include bedrooms and extension to rear.

LOCATION: 60 Overstone Road, Sywell, Wellingborough.

APPLICANT: Mr and Mrs O'Keefe.

This application has been called before the Regulatory Committee by a Council member on the grounds that the development would unduly affect the amenity of a neighbouring property.

PROPOSAL AND DESCRIPTION OF SITE: The proposal site is located within the village of Sywell on the classified Overstone Road and forms a single bungalow development built in the 1960’s. The property is set back from Overstone Road and from the neighbouring properties. The proposed extension consists of an increase to the existing foot print, to the rear, together with an increase to the height of the property to include dormer windows in the roof and a single storey element in the centre of the property.

The properties on Overstone Road form a linear development, although the application property is set back from the highway. The properties in the street are of various ages, types and sizes. This application has been submitted following the withdrawal and refusal of previous schemes and subsequent advice of planning officers.

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY: WR/66/151 Bungalow – approved. WP/2006/0230/F Temp. static home – conditionally approved. WP/2006/0398/F Part demolish existing and re-build new extension – withdrawn. WP/2006/0517/F Single storey rear kitchen extension and addition of upper floor rooms to bungalow – refused (Currently being appealed against to the Planning Inspectorate - decision pending).

NATIONAL AND LOCAL PLANNING POLICY: Borough Council of Wellingborough Local Plan Policies: G1, H1 and H12.

267300 ANE 267300

7 2

Recreation Ground El Sub Sta

P I E 1 C 4 672 O 672 R N E

R 1

H D A O R

4 N 5 O T 0 5 S R E 52 V O

Overstone 56 671 Heights 671

B 118.9m

5 1

5 9 D

6 5 76 l

w 6 y 7 S f E 80 o ry C a im ol Pr ho Sc 267000 267000

481600 817 481800 86

6 6 1

B Scale 1:1250 3 R E E

2 1 Sywell m B 79 R Primary I D C of E School 70

SUMMARY OF REPLIES TO CONSULTATIONS/REPRESENTATIONS RECEIVED: 1. Council Member: - concerns about design and impact.

2. Conservation Officer -

‘I have been involved in pre-application discussions on this scheme and am happy with the re-design’.

3. 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.

4. Occupier 59, Overstone Road - ‘no objection’.

5. Occupier 58, Overstone Road - summary of objections:

• ‘back-land development’ • Walled-in effect. • Out of character of its surroundings. • Would result in an unacceptable loss of light and overlooking. • The proposal would prejudice future development of adjoining land for both 58 and 62. • The proposed development in not considered compatible with the characteristics of the site and its surroundings.

ASSESSMENT: This application is a re-submission on an application refused by the regulatory committee, and is currently pending a decision from the Planning Inspectorate, in respect to a subsequently submitted appeal. The alterations from the previous proposal involves a reduction in the overall height of the property, the omission of front dormers to the rear elevation and a significant alteration to the layout of the dwellings involving a single storey element to the centre of the property with first floor dormer elements to the rear and front of the dwelling.

Affect upon Neighbours Amenity There are no properties located to the rear of the site and 59 and 65 Overstone Road are approximately 65 metres from the proposed development at their nearest point and will be mostly screened from view by fencing and vegetation to the front of the properties and is therefore considered that the application has no loss of amenity issues to properties fronting the site to the south/east. Given that there are no windows proposed in either first floor side elevation, apart from a small circular window on the gable to give light, there are no loss of privacy issues to neighbouring properties.

The current location of the bungalow is set back from the neighbouring properties, with the front of the application property being to the same line as rear of the neighbouring 58 Overstone Road, the proposed alterations will be set back from the existing. The existing property therefore does impact upon the amount of light received to the rear windows of 58 in the afternoons and late evening and in the morning to 62 Overstone Road. It is accepted that the overall height of the property is increasing from its existing 4m (flat-roof) to a total height of 6m at the extremity of the pitch. This pitch however 71

decreases to the rear, beyond the 60 degree line drawn from the middle rear nearest window of no. 58 as specified in SPG II: Building Better Places for single storey extensions. It is acknowledged that the proposed height is higher than a typical single storey extension but given the impact of the existing property and the roof slopping down beyond the 60 degree line to 4m, which is maintained for a further 4m of the side elevation length, before the pitch rises again, the loss of light to no. 58 is therefore not considered to be of such a degree so as to justify refusal of the application.

It is therefore considered that the proposed development is in accordance with Policies G1.2 and H12.4 of Borough Council of Wellingborough Local Plan, in that the proposal is not considered to unduly impinge upon the private amenity afforded to neighbouring dwellings in terms of loss of privacy and overshadowing.

Loss of Amenity Space Given the properties rear garden space of approximately 50m in length remains the proposed extension is considered to be sustainable within the site and therefore does not justify refusal of the application.

Highway Implications The driveway in front of the property will be approximately 23 metres in length and is therefore in accordance to the 5.5 minimum standard, with sufficient space for off-road parking for 6 cars plus. The property is to go no closer to the highway than the existing property and therefore does not impact upon the safety and convenience of the highway. 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.

Character and Setting of Locality Although the vicinity is not considered to be of any notable architectural design or character to warrant special designation in the local plan, it is important to consider the application and any affect it may have on its surroundings. It is therefore considered, that the pitch of the roof reflects the scale and height of the two adjoining properties, with any dormer windows proposed located to the rear elevations, the design is considered to be of a better design than the currently existing bungalow and it’s predominately flat-roofed design and therefore the design of the extension is felt to enhance its surroundings.

It is acknowledged that the layout of the property to the rear, with a single storey section giving separation to two dormer bungalow sections to the front and rear is non- traditional, but given that the dwelling is set back from neighbouring properties and the need to maintain their amenities and the fact the front is in-keeping, the character of the area is maintained. These sentiments are echoed by the Conservation Officer and therefore the application is considered to be in accordance with Policies G1.1 and H12.1 of the Local Plan.

Response to Representations The Council Member’s comments and the comments of the occupier of 58 Overstone Road, in relation to the effect the extension may have on the character of the area and loss of amenity have been taken into account when making a recommendation and are 72

discussed above. The comments made by N.C.C. as the highways authority have been considered when recommending the application and are also discussed above.

No. 58 Overstone Road also suggested that the application would be contrary to Policy H1, in that the proposal would prejudice the future development of adjoining land. It is concluded that the development would not compromise development of land to the rear, as the property is existing and not a ‘new dwelling’ and does not prevent any future extensions planned/or not by neighbouring property’s as any development is confined within the site. It is also suggested that the development may be considered ‘back land’ development but given that the proposed development involves the extension and alterations to an existing property and does not involve ‘tandem’ development the application is considered to be in accordance with Policy H1.

Planning Out Crime Implications Having consulted Supplementary Planning Guidance IV: Planning Out Crime in Northamptonshire there are no crime implications with regard the extension.

Summary On balance, it is considered that the proposed extensions are considered to be in accordance with Policies G1, H1 and H12 of the Borough Council of Wellingborough Local Plan and is hereby recommended for approval, with appropriate conditions.

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. 3. In the interests of neighbours privacy 4. In the interests of neighbours privacy

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: H1, G1 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: 001 10/11/2006

BOROUGH COUNCIL OF WELLINGBOROUGH AGENDA ITEM

FOR INFORMATION

Regulatory Committee 03/01/2007

Report of the Executive Director

APPLICATION REF: WP/2006/0596/C

PROPOSAL: Proposed extension and extension of existing accommodation within attic space.

LOCATION: All Saints Church of England Primary School, Castle Street, Wellingborough.

APPLICANT: Board of Governors.

NOTE: Approved by Northamptonshire County Council on 8th December 2006 subject to the following condition/s:-

Time Limit

1. The development hereby permitted shall be begun not later than the expiration of three 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. Drawing Nos. 03.06.01, 03.06.02B, Design and Statement and Planning Support Statement.

Materials

3. All materials on the proposed extension shall match those on the existing adjoining building as closely as possible with regard to type, colour and texture.

Hours of Construction Works

4. Except as may otherwise be agreed in writing by the County Planning Authoirty all construction works shall be confined to the hours of 7.30 a.m. to 5.30 p.m. Mondays to Friday and 8.00 a.m. to 1.00 p.m. on Saturdays, with no works on Sundays, or Public Holidays.

1 15 6 AD K RO

PAL

2 9

6 4

2 4 a

2 4 B 56.4m Victoria

7 489600 Car Park 3 489800

8 1 a

0 Borough Council Of Wellingborough: Licence No.100018694. Published 24/10/2006

23 3 0

897 8

a 2 8

2 6 Club 267900 55.5m B 267900

Works 2 1

t o

ub Sta 3 0

1 to 20 0

o 2

KNOX COURT o 1 Carter Close t

1 1 Great Glen 151

Factory

1 to 6 Cromwell House 83 Hotel 97 119 12 125 3 135 11 131 1 113 115 117 121 127

52.7m B BM 50.55m ( @

B 50.6m

BM @

4 52.62 MIDLAND ROAD

4 m 4

D 4

( 6

DA 5

8 8

7 6 a 0 6 4 2 3 6 7 6

LB 6 1 to 5 to 0

hurch 7 36 (

R d r Flats 1 to 16 C

678 s 678 ( '

C o

e s

n u

o o

t h

y e

D W

a 1

C d AS n TL a E M

E D

W E

2 1 S

1 1

ment Gardens

3 6 to 18 1 All Saints' C of E

Primary School Fields View

6 2 2

5 o

t 1

2 D Y D D B k nspool Broo 46.9m Swa Castle Cottage

l E D

The Dell 677 D 677

2 Park

T t View

1 E D

12 E D

T 4 2 S A D 34 C DDD D D

Surger 1 y 1

9 D D D D D D

1 1

a OAD R 1

9 D

2 2

2 B 1 50.0m D D

2 D 7

Castle D

Court

4 1 267600 3 D 267600 489600 D 489800 897 3 7 Scale 1:1250

D a

4 3 D

1 6

3 B 52.1m

Wellingborough School The Richard Gent Centre D Cemetery 75

Reasons for conditions and relevant Development Plan Policies

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

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. Drawings Nos. 03.06.01, 03.06.02B, Design and Statement and Planning Support Statement.

3. In the interests of visual amenity and in accordance with policies GS5 (Design) of Northamptonshire County Structure Plan (2001) and G1 of the Borough of Wellingborough Local Plan (1999).

4. To protect the amenities of nearby occupiers of property from noise and other disturbance and to have regard for policy G1 of the Borough of Wellingborough Local Plan (1999).

Reasons for Approval

The siting, size and design of the proposed extension is considered to be acceptable and in keeping with the character and appearance of the existing school. It is also considered that the proposed extension will not have an adverse impact on the residential amenity of neighbouring properties.

The application is therefore considered to be acceptable in accordance with policy GS5 (Design) of the Northamptonshire County Structure Plan (2001) and policy G1 of the Borough of Wellingborough Local Plan (1999).

76 3rd January 2007

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/2006/0590/F Mr and Mrs D Atkinson 5 Moorlands, Wellingborough. AC First floor extension over existing garage.

WP/2006/0593/F Julie Hubbard Parochial rooms adjacent 13 AC College Street, Wollaston. To refurbish the building inside and out including the construction of a ramp to the street side of the building in order to comply with the requirements of the Disability Discrimination Act 1994.

WP/2006/0594/F Mr M J Evans 205 Wollaston Road, REFUSED Irchester. Vehicular access.

WP/2006/0595/LB The Religious Society of Friends Meeting House, St AC Friends Northampton and Johns Street, Wellingborough Wellingborough. Roof re-slating.

WP/2006/0597/F Mr P Patel 104 Mill Road, AC Wellingborough. First floor side and rear extension.

WP/2006/0599/F Mr M Forbes and Ms J Moody The Old Marquis, 2 London AC Road, Wollaston. Extension to annexe dwelling (annexe dwelling previously approved but works were not completed).

WP/2006/0600/LB Mr M Forbes and Ms J Moody The Old Marquis, 2 London AC Road, Wollaston. Side extension and ancillary works to curtilage listed building.

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

WP/2006/0606/F Mr L Beaver, Datum CAD 36 Hatton Park Road, AC Services Wellingborough. Double storey extension to side and over existing kitchen at rear.

WP/2006/0608/F Mr and Mrs Lockhart 7 Clayland Close, Bozeat. AC Conservatory to rear.

WP/2006/0609/F Mr C Spimpolo 8 New Street, AC Wellingborough. Convert existing dwelling into two flats (flat 8a - two bedroom, flat 8b 1 bedroom).

WP/2006/0610/LB Mr Robert Phillips The Limes, 40 Church Street, AC Finedon. Proposed conservatory and new window to kitchen.

WP/2006/0613/LB J Edge and G Halliday 'The Grange', 1 Church Way, AC Ecton. Demolition of existing sun room and lean-to extension, replacement with new sun- room, internal alterations to kitchen, dining, hall and bathroom. Enlargement of one first floor window.

WP/2006/0614/F J Edge and G Halliday 'The Grange', 1 Church Way, AC Ecton. Replacement of sun room.

WP/2006/0616/LB Mr and Mrs P Webb Orlingbury Hall, The Green, AC Orlingbury. Extension to existing hall to provide private indoor swimming pool and changing rooms.

WP/2006/0618/F Mr and Mrs P Webb Orlingbury Hall, 1 The Green, AC Orlingbury. Extension to existing hall to provide indoor swimming pool and changing rooms etc.

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

WP/2006/0619/LB Lloyds TSB Bank PLC Lloyds TSB Bank, 48 Market AC Street, Wellingborough. Floodlight front elevation of building and replacement signage with new style bank branding.

WP/2006/0620/F Mr Robert Nash 22 Troon Crescent, AC Wellingborough. Amendments to approved planning application ref: WP/2004/0550/F. 1) Relocate Velux roof lights within roof area; 2) Add additional window 1st floor landing; 3) Modify approved bedroom layout from 5 bed to 4 bed.

WP/2006/0623/F Mr D MacLennan West Lodge, Sywell Lane, AC Ecton. Renovation of farmhouse and conversion of attached barns.

WP/2006/0624/LB Mr D MacLennan West Lodge, Sywell Lane, AC Ecton. Renovation of farmhouse and conversion of attached barns.

WP/2006/0626/F GB Railfreight Neilson Sidings Access Road, AC Network Rail, Meadow Close, Wellingborough. Retention of planning permission WP/2006/0094/F without compliance with condition 5 (The sole vehicular access and exit for Heavy Good Vehicles (HGV) shall be via Meadow Close. There shall be no more than 20 HGV (10 in and 10 out via this route in any week) - application to increase vehicular movements to 20 in and 20 out a week, out of peak hours.

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

WP/2006/0629/F Ellswood Estates Land to side and rear of 103 AC Gladstone WMC, Wellingborough Road, Finedon. Erection of 3 apartments over garage block. (Application is for 1 additional apartment - Approval WP/2005/0782/F allowed permission for 2 flats over block of 4 garages).

WP/2006/0631/F Ms V Coultham 143 Wellingborough Road, AC Finedon. Vehicular access.

WP/2006/0632/F Mr and Mrs K Nicholls 5 Clare Close, Earls Barton. AC New conservatory to rear.

WP/2006/0633/LB Mr C Bean Manor Farm House, 2 APPROVED Orlingbury Road, Isham. Replacement of deteriorated box sash windows and casement windows. Repointing of stonework.

WP/2006/0641/F Fernbrook Builders Limited 39-43 Rixon Road, APPROVED Wellingborough. Overcladding of building and subdivision of building.

WP/2006/0642/F National Autistic Society National Autistic Society AC Home, 97 Gillitts Road, Wellingborough. Proposed alterations and extensions forming 2 no. kitchenettes at ground floor level.

WP/2006/0650/F Mr L Worsley 47 Torrington Crescent, AC Wellingborough. Conservatory to rear of property.

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

WP/2006/0659/F Terry Saunders 115 Medway Drive, AC Wellingborough. Double storey extension to side over garage.

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: 11/12/06

Application No. Name & Address Description FP/2006/2178/ Ms Linda Lovell Two storey side extension 21 Fourth Avenue REJECTED Wellingborough

FP/2006/2425/ Mrs J Barker Proposed single storey extension to 9 High Street rear APPROVED C Earls Barton Wellingborough

FP/2006/3265/ Mr and Mrs D Smith Two storey side extension and front 5 Harrison Close porch APPROVED C Wellingborough

FP/2006/3266/ Mr and Mrs J Bush Single storey rear extension 57 Westminster Road APPROVED Wellingborough

FP/2006/3291/ Time Leisure Limited Proposed new workshop Nene Court REJECTED The Embankment Wellingborough

BN/2006/3583/ Mr Kevin Harford Re-roof of kitchen extension (with 102 Northampton Road skylights) move kitchen/cloakroom ACCEPTED Wellingborough wall to make cloakroom larger and lintel for new lounge/dining room division 82

REGULATORY COMMITTEE APPLICATIONS DEALT WITH

APPLICATION DECISIONS BOROUGH OF WELLINGBOROUGH Date: 11/12/06

Application No. Name & Address Description BN/2006/3679/ T.J and R Littler Dwelling house Lyttleton House ACCEPTED Hemington Oundle

PS/2006/3689/ Daventry District Council Garden room and kitchen extension Building Control Manager APPROVED Lodge Road Daventry

PS/2006/3714/ Kettering Borough Council First floor and rear kitchen Bowling Green Road extension APPROVED Kettering

DI/2006/3715/ Mr R Fearon Level access shower 2 Diana House ACCEPTED Wellingborough

FP/2006/3722/ F B S Limited Replace flat roof with pitched roof 2 Spring Studios APPROVED Spring Gardens Wellingborough

BN/2006/3723/ S Farrar-Hayton Conversion of garage to room 34 The Banks ACCEPTED Wellingborough 83

REGULATORY COMMITTEE APPLICATIONS DEALT WITH

APPLICATION DECISIONS BOROUGH OF WELLINGBOROUGH Date: 11/12/06

Application No. Name & Address Description BN/2006/3725/ M Carrington Re-wire 3 Church Lane ACCEPTED Wilby Wellingborough

BN/2006/3726/ Mr R S Fisher Removal of internal wall (kitchen) 24 Park Street ACCEPTED Wollaston Wellingborough

WI/2006/3727/ Michael Wilson External door and window 2 Ouse Close replacement ACCEPTED Wellingborough

BN/2006/3806/ Philip Saxby Semi detached house, internal The Old Barn alterations to form kitchen with ACCEPTED Farndish Road structural opening and patio doors Irchester Wellingborough