Planning Committee - Agenda and reports 30 April 2014

Transcription

Planning Committee
Wednesday 30 April 2014 at 7.00 pm
Council Chamber, Swanspool House, Doddington Road,
Wellingborough, Northamptonshire NN8 1BP

1.
Apologies for absence.
2.
Declarations of Interest (completed forms to be handed to the committee
clerk).

3.
Confirmation of the minutes of the meeting held on 26/03/2014.

4.
Applications for planning permission, listed building consent, building


regulation approval and appeal information.
5.
Planning Appeal Decisions:

31 Station Road, Mackworth Drive, Finedon; and

Former Gold Street Medical Centre, 106 Gold Street, Wellingborough.

Planning Appeal Costs Award:
43-45 Midland Road, Wellingborough.
6.

Any other items that the Chairman decides are urgent.
Enclosed
Site Viewing Group for 29 April 2014 will be Councillors Ward, Griffiths, Timms, Dholakia and
Morrall.
John T Campbell
Chief Executive
Date issued: 21 April 2014.
For further information contact Fiona Hubbard on 01933 231519; fax 01933 231543;
[email protected]
If you wish to address the Committee on an agenda item you can register by:
 going on-line to ‘on-line forms’ then ‘addressing Council meetings’; or
 completing the appropriate form which is available at reception desks; or
 contacting Fiona Hubbard.
Membership: Councillor Ward (Chairman), Councillor Griffiths (Vice Chairman),
Councillors Beirne, Bell, Dholakia, L Lawman, Maguire, Morrall, Scarborough,
Timms and Waters.
Swanspool House, Doddington Road, Wellingborough, Northamptonshire NN8 1BP
Tel: 01933 229777 Fax: 01933 231684
www.wellingborough.gov.uk
BOROUGH COUNCIL OF WELLINGBOROUGH
AGENDA ITEM
th
PLANNING COMMITTEE
2
30 April 2014
DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST UNDER THE CODE OF CONDUCT
When the Chairman calls for declarations of interest in matters to be considered at the meeting you
must declare orally:
 any relevant ‘Registrable Interest’ that is not in the register of interests,
 any relevant ‘Other Interest’.
Registrable interests in the register of interests do not need to be declared orally to the
meeting.
Members are reminded that if they have a registrable Interest that is a disclosable pecuniary
interest in any matter to be considered at the meeting they cannot participate, or participate further,
in any discussion of the matter at the meeting; or participate in any vote, or further vote, taken on
the matter at the meeting unless they have first obtained a dispensation from the Monitoring Officer
in advance of the meeting.
An extract from the Code of Conduct relating to declarations of interest is printed on the reverse of
this form.
Please write down your interests in the table below. If you have no registrable interests to
declare, please state ‘none’ on the form. You are still required to declare your interest orally
at the meeting.
Councillor name:
Committee/date/ Title
minute number
Type of interest Reason for interest
(please tick)
 Registerable
 DPI
 Other
 Registerable
 DPI
 Other
 Registerable
 DPI
 Other
 Registerable
 DPI
 Other
 Registerable
 DPI
 Other
 Registerable
 DPI
 Other
Please place this completed declaration form in the basket (on the table next to the exit) at
the end of the meeting to ensure your declaration is recorded accurately.
Declaration of interests: page 1 of 5
Extract (modified) from the Code of Conduct 2012
Part 2 – Interests
4
4.1
4.2
4.3
4.4
5
5.1
5.2
5.3
5.4
5.5
6
6.1
6.2
6.3
Registerable Interests
You must within 28 days of this Code being adopted by or applied to the authority; or your election or appointment to office (where that
is later), notify the Monitoring Officer in writing of the details of your interests within the following categories, for inclusion in the authority’s
register of interests:
4.1.1
any disclosable pecuniary interests you are required to disclose. You have a disclosable pecuniary interest if it is of a description
specified in regulations made by the Secretary of State (see Appendix A) and either:
(a) it is an interest of yours, or
(b) it is an interest of:
(i)
your spouse or civil partner;
(ii)
a person with whom you are living as husband and wife, or
(iii) a person with whom you are living as if you were civil partners
and you are aware that that other person has the interest.
4.1.2
details of any body of which you are a member or in a position of general control or management and to which you are appointed
or nominated by your authority
4.1.3
details of any body exercising functions of a public nature, any body directed to charitable purposes or any body one of
whose principal purposes includes the influence of public opinion or policy (including any political party or trade union), of
which you are:
(a) a member, or
(b) in a position of general control or management;
You are expected to ensure that your register of interests is kept up to date and notify the Monitoring Officer in writing within 28 days of
becoming aware of any change in respect of your disclosable pecuniary interests and other registerable interests.
You may inform the Monitoring Officer if you consider that disclosure of the details of the interest could lead to you, or a person connected
with you, being subject to violence or intimidation. If the Monitoring Officer agrees with your view, the interest is treated as a “sensitive
interest” for the purposes of the Code
If a sensitive interest is entered in the authority’s register, copies of the register that are made available for inspection, and any published
version of the register, will not include details of the interest (but may state you have an interest the details of which are withheld).
Disclosure of Interests and Participation at Meetings
If you attend a meeting and
5.1.1
have and are or become aware, or should reasonably be aware, that you have an interest of the type described in paragraph 4.1
above in any matter to be considered, or being considered, at that meeting, and
5.1.2
the interest is not entered in the authority’s register of members’ interests,
you should (and must if the interest is a disclosable pecuniary interest) disclose to the meeting the fact that you have an interest in that
matter and the nature of that interest, at or before the consideration of the item of business or as soon as the interest becomes apparent.
Where your interest is a “sensitive interest” for the purposes of the Code, you need not disclose the details of the sensitive interest to the
meeting, but merely the fact that you have an interest in the matter concerned.
If you have and are aware or become aware, or should reasonably be aware, that you have
5.3.1
a disclosable pecuniary interest in any matter to be considered, or being considered, at a meeting, or
5.3.2
any other registerable interest in any matter to be considered, or being considered, at a meeting, and
(a) the matter to be considered, or being considered, at that meeting:
(i) affects your financial position or the financial position of a person or body through whom the interest arises ;or
(ii) relates to the determining of any approval, consent, licence, permission or registration in relation to you or any person
through whom the interest arises, and
(b) the interest is one which a member of the public with knowledge of the relevant facts would reasonably regard as so
1
significant that it is likely to prejudice your judgment of the public interest ,
you should not, and must not if the interest is a disclosable pecuniary interest,:
5.3.3
participate, or participate further, in any discussion of the matter at the meeting other than to the extent permitted by the authority’s
2
Procedure Rules in respect of registerable interests other than disclosable pecuniary interests ; or
5.3.4
participate in any vote, or further vote, taken on the matter at the meeting
unless you have first obtained a dispensation from the Monitoring Officer in advance of the meeting.
In addition, i f the authority’s Procedure Rules require you to leave the room where the meeting is held while any discussion or voting
on the matter takes place, you must do so.
“Meeting” means any meeting organised by or on behalf of the authority, including:
5.4.1
any meeting of the authority, or a committee or sub-committee of the authority (including joint committees and joint subcommittees)
5.4.2
meetings of working parties
5.4.3
any briefing by officers (e.g. to political groups or lead advisers); and
5.4.4
any site visit to do with business of the authority
If you seek to discuss with an officer a matter that, if it were to be considered at a meeting of the authority, you would not be able to
participate in the discussion of, or voting on, by virtue of the matter relating to a registerable interest of yours, you are expected to inform
the officer of that interest in advance of any discussion and accept that the officer has discretion as to whether or not to discuss the matter
with you; save that he or she cannot treat you less favourably than he or she would treat a member of the public wishing to discuss a
matter of the same type.
Other Interests
In addition to the requirements of Paragraph 5, where you have an interest described in paragraph 6.3 below in any business of the
authority, and
6.1.1
where you are aware or ought reasonably to be aware of the existence of that interest, and
6.1.2
you attend a meeting of the authority at which the business is considered,
you are expected to disclose to that meeting the existence and nature of that interest at the commencement of that consideration,
or when the interest becomes apparent.
Where your interest is a “sensitive interest” for the purposes of this Code, you need not disclose the details of the sensitive interest to the
meeting, but merely the fact that you have an interest in the matter concerned.
You have an interest for the purposes of paragraph 6.1 of this Code where:
1 A registerable interest that satisfies the tests in paragraphs 5.3.2 (a) and (b) shall be known as a prejudicial interest for the purpose of declarations of interest at a
meeting.
2 These rules are to the effect that if the matter is one on which an ordinary member of the public would be allowed to address the meeting you are provided with the
same opportunity. If an ordinary member of the public is not allowed to speak on the matter, you cannot do so.
6.3.1
a decision in relation to that matter might reasonably be regarded as affecting the well-being or financial standing of you or a
member of your family or a person or body with whom you have a close association to a greater extent than it would affect the
majority of the Council Tax payers, ratepayers or inhabitants of the ward or electoral area for which you have been elected or
otherwise of the authority’s administrative area, or
6.3.2 it relates to or is likely to affect any of the interests listed in the Table in the Appendix A to this Code, but in respect of a member of your
family (other than a “relevant person”) or a person with whom you have a close association and you are aware that that other person has
the interest
and that interest is not a disclosable pecuniary interest or any interest you should register in accordance with paragraph 4 of this Code.
6.4
If the matter to be considered, or being considered, at that meeting:
6.4.1
affects your financial position or the financial position of a person or body through whom the interest arises ;or
6.4.2
relates to the determining of any approval, consent, licence, permission or registration in relation to you or any person through
whom the interest arises, and
6.4.3
the interest is one which a member of the public with knowledge of the relevant facts would reasonably regard as so
3
significant that it is likely to prejudice your judgment of the public interest ,
you should not:
6.4.4
participate, or participate further, in any discussion of the matter at the meeting other than to the extent permitted by the authority’s
4
Procedure Rules for such interests ; or
6.4.5
participate in any vote, or further vote, taken on the matter at the meeting
unless you have first obtained a dispensation from the Monitoring Officer in advance of the meeting.
In addition, i f the authority’s Procedure Rules require you to leave the room where the meeting is held while any discussion or voting
on the matter takes place, you must do so.
6.5
If you seek to discuss with an officer a matter that, if it were to be considered at a meeting of the authority, you would not be able to
participate in the discussion of, or voting on, by virtue of the matter relating to an interest of yours of the type described in paragraph 6.3,
you are expected to inform the officer of that interest in advance of any discussion and accept that the officer has discretion as to whether
or not to discuss the matter with you; save that he or she cannot treat you less favourably than he or she would treat a member of the
public wishing to discuss a matter of the same type.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appendix A
Disclosable Pecuniary Interests
The duties to register, disclose and not to participate in respect of any matter in which a member has a Disclosable Pecuniary Interest (DPI) are
set out in Chapter 7 of the Localism Act 2011. Breaches of the rules relating to DPIs may lead to criminal sanctions being imposed.
Chapter 7 of the Localism Act 2011 provides that a pecuniary interest is a “disclosable pecuniary interest” in relation to a member (M), if it is
of a description specified in regulations made by the Secretary of State and either:
(a) it is an interest of M’s, or
(b) it is an interest of:
(i) M’s spouse or civil partner,
(ii) a person with whom M is living as husband and wife, or
(iii) a person with whom M is living as if they were civil partners,
and M is aware that that other person has the interest.
DPIs are defined in The Relevant Authorities (Disclosable Pecuniary Interests) Regulations 2012 (SI No. 1464) as follows:
Interest
Prescribed description
Employment, office, trade Any employment, office, trade, profession or vocation carried on for profit or gain.
profession or vocation
Sponsorship
Any payment or provision of any other financial benefit (other than from the relevant authority) made or provided within
the relevant period in respect of any expenses incurred by M in carrying out duties as a member, or towards the
election expenses of M.
This includes any payment or financial benefit from a trade union within the meaning of the Trade Union and Labour
Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992).
Contracts
Any contract which is made between the relevant person (or a body in which the relevant person has a beneficial
interest) and the relevant authority—
(a) under which goods or services are to be provided or works are to be executed; and
(b) which has not been fully discharged.
Land
Any beneficial interest in land which is within the area of the relevant authority.
Licences
Any licence (alone or jointly with others) to occupy land in the area of the relevant authority for a month or longer.
Corporate tenancies
Any tenancy where (to M’s knowledge)—
(a) the landlord is the relevant authority; and
(b) the tenant is a body in which the relevant person has a beneficial interest.
Securities
Any beneficial interest in securities of a body where—
(a) that body (to M’s knowledge) has a place of business or land in the area of the relevant authority; and
(b) either—
(i) the total nominal value of the securities exceeds £25,000 or one hundredth of the total issued share capital of that
body; or
(ii) if the share capital of that body is of more than one class, the total nominal value of the shares of any one class in
which the relevant person has a beneficial interest exceeds one hundredth of the total issued share capital of that
class.
For this purpose:
“the Act” means the Localism Act 2011;
“body in which the relevant person has a beneficial interest” means a firm in which the relevant person is a partner or a body corporate of which the
relevant person is a director, or in the securities of which the relevant person has a beneficial interest;
“director” includes a member of the committee of management of an industrial and provident society;
“land” excludes an easement, servitude, interest or right in or over land which does not carry with it a right for the relevant person (alone or jointly with
another) to occupy the land or to receive income;
“M” means a member of a relevant authority;
“member” includes a co-opted member;
“relevant authority” means the authority of which M is a member;
“relevant period” means the period of 12 months ending with the day on which M gives a notification for the purposes of section 30(1) or 31(7), as the
case may be, of the Act;
3 An other interest that satisfies the tests in paragraphs 6.4.1 to 6.4.3 shall also be known as a prejudicial interest for the purpose of declarations of interest at a
meeting.
4 These rules are to the effect that if the matter is one on which an ordinary member of the public would be allowed to address the meeting you are provided with the
same opportunity. If an ordinary member of the public is not allowed to speak on the matter, you cannot do so.
“relevant person” means M or M’s spouse or civil partner, a person with whom M is living as husband and wife, or a person with whom M is living as if
they were civil partners;
“securities” means shares, debentures, debenture stock, loan stock, bonds, units of a collective investment scheme within the meaning of the
Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 and other securities of any description, other than money deposited with a building society.
DECLARING INTERESTS FLOWCHART – QUESTIONS TO ASK YOURSELF
What matters are being discussed at the meeting?
Do any relate to my interests?
A
Does the matter affect my registerable interests?
OR
B
Does it:

affect the well-being or financial standing of me or a member of my
family or a person or body with whom I have a close association to a
greater extent than it would affect the majority of the Council Tax payers,
ratepayers or inhabitants of the ward for which I have been elected, or

relate to or is likely to affect any of the interests listed in the Table in
Appendix A of the Code, but in respect of a member of my family (other
than a “relevant person”) or a person or body with whom I have a close
association
AND that interest is not a registerable interest?
You cannot
participate in the
meeting and vote
unless you have a
dispensation.
Also, withdraw from
the meeting by leaving
the room.
Is the interest on
the register of
interests?
Disclose the
existence and
nature of your
interest.
NO
YES
You can
participate in
the meeting
and vote.
Is it a disclosable
pecuniary interest?
YES
In the interests of
transparency tell the
Chairman your reason
NO
Does the matter:
You should not
participate in the
meeting and vote,
unless you have a
dispensation.
Also, withdraw from the
meeting by leaving the
room.
In the interests of
transparency tell the
Chairman your reason
for withdrawing
YES

affect my financial position or the
financial position of a person or body
through whom the interest arises; or

relate to the determining of any approval,
consent, licence, permission or
registration in relation to me or any
person through whom the interest arises,
AND
Is the interest one which a member of the
public with knowledge of the relevant facts
would reasonably regard as so significant
that it is likely to prejudice my judgment of
the public interest?
Agenda item
4
Borough Council of Wellingborough
Planning Committee
Wednesday 30 April 2014 at 7.00 pm
Council Chamber, Swanspool House
INDEX
Application
Location
WP/2014/0059
3 South Street Isham Kettering
Site Viewing Group
WP/2013/0674
WP/2014/0029
Page
No.
Irthlingborough Grange
Irthlingborough Road Wellingborough
Site Viewing Group
2
22
38a British Rail Sports And Social Club
Broad Green Wellingborough
27
38a British Rail Sports and Social Club
Broad Green Wellingborough
45
WP/2014/0068
56 Main Road Grendon
62
WP/2014/0069
56 Main Road Grendon
65
WP/2014/0082
First Floor 39b Cambridge Street
Wellingborough
69
County Buildings/Knapp Toolmaking Ltd
45-51 London Road Wellingborough
76
WP/2014/0030
WP/2014/0085
WP/2014/0037
Planning Committee
30 April 2014
100 Wollaston School Irchester Road
Wollaston
For Information
1 of 105
102
Planning Committee
30 April 2014
SITE VIEWING (Date of visit Tuesday 29th April 2014 at 10.15 a.m.)
Report of the Head of Planning and Local Development
Case Officer Alan Chapman
WP/2014/0059
Date received
Date valid
Overall Expiry
13 February 2014 13 February 2014 9 April 2014
Ward
North
Parish
Isham
Applicant Mr J Coles
Agent
Mr Robert Ocallaghan
Location
3 South Street Isham Kettering Northamptonshire NN14 1HP
Proposal Erection of a new detached dwelling - (re-submission following the
refusal of planning application ref: WP/2013/0593) - revised plans.
PLANNING HISTORY:
TCON/2010/0009
24.09.2010
Works to Willow Tree
WP/2014/0059
Determination pending.
Erection of a new detached dwelling - (re-submission following the
refusal of planning application ref: WP/2013/0593) - revised plans.
WP/2013/0593
Refused
Erection of a new detached dwelling - amended.
PRE/2013/0030
22.01.2014
15.05.2013
Pair of semi-detached 2/3 bedroom dormer bungalows
WP/1992/0118
15.04.1992
First floor extension to side of house
BW/1989/0244
Refused
Erection of new house with domestic garage.
WR/1959/0116
27.10.1959
Conversion of barn into garage
Planning Committee
30 April 2014
18.05.1989
2 of 105
Isham
Farm
H STR EET
14
22
30
RC
3
1
26
12
54
32
25
35
33
U
CH
Chapel
WP/2014/0059/F
10
43
50
18a
39
8a
46
8
Pear Tree Cott
All Saints
House
25
4
1
b
Ju
ce
8
1
2
LB
15
E
3
38
ra
er
eT
OS
6
7
S
4
6
3
2a
2
1a
Tithe Barn
T
OU
7
HS
TR
9
T
EE
28
4
1
5
36
18
8
10
The Brambles
1
16
MA N OR
6
14
12
C L OS E
3
6
2
Manor
House
Farm
ile
9
M
E
ET
CL
11
DL
ID
RE
ST
K
Hall
R
PA
19
17
GR
Allerton House
EEN
L AN
k
Trac
E
Legend
±
WP/2014/0059/F - 3 South Street, Isham
Scale:
1:1,250
Planning & Local
Development
This map is accurate
to the scale specified
when reproduced at A4
© Crown Copyright
and database right 2014.
Ordnance Survey 100018694.
Cities Revealed
Aerial Photography copyright:
GetMapping PLC 1999
Description
Applicants Property
Application Site
WP/2001/0056
10.07.2001
Two storey extension and garage
Deferred from previous committee for Site Viewing Group to visit.
Late letters were received as follows:
Third Party objections received from:
5 Park Close
"Following my email and attached note, dated 27th February 2014, outlying my
objections to the Planning Application: WP/2014/0059.
I have examined the revised application (letter dated 21st February) and my objections
contained in my original email and note still stand, as nothing has significantly changed.
Therefore, I want my objections to be taken into consideration for the original and
revised Planning Application.
Please would you advise me of date and times of the Site Visit and the Committee
meeting?"
3 South Street
"I would like to object to this proposal for the following reasons.
I believe that this proposal does not address some of the reasons given for the previous
applications refusal:
The development will still be detrimental to the safety and convenience and users of the
highway,
The development is, in my opinion, contrary to CSS Policy 13 Part D (satisfactory
means of access and the provision for parking, servicing & manoeuvring)
The development is, in my opinion, contrary to CSS Policy 13 Part N (it prejudices
highway safety).
The development is, in my opinion, contrary to CSS Policy 10 (which proposes limited
development in villages).
Throughout the planning statement repeated references are made to turning heads
being shown to prove the ability of vehicles to access the site but this isn't the case.
The proposed site plan DOES NOT address how vehicles will access the proposed
development from the highway; it only shows turning heads for vehicles to travel from
South St to the existing garage and from the proposed parking spaces to the proposed
shared driveway. Vehicular access from south street to the proposed parking spaces
will be very awkward and will involve approaching the shared driveway on the wrong
side of the narrow road and will require a second reversing manoeuvre back towards
the highway to complete the turn. It will also require the shared driveway to remain free
of other vehicles (which is fine on a drawing, but is less likely in practice).
The proposed dwelling has two parking spaces allocated to it and, because the shard
driveway needs to be free of vehicles, it means that the existing dwelling (3 south st)
Planning Committee
30 April 2014
3 of 105
also has two parking spaces. There is no allowance for visitors/service vehicles to
either of these properties and there is no room for additional parking on the street in this
area. This problem will only be exacerbated when the dwelling currently under
construction on the other side of 3 South St is completed and there are even more
vehicles in this very narrow village street. It is my opinion that these factors will have a
very real and direct detrimental effect on the safety of users of the highway in this area many of which are elderly or families and small children who use the road to get to the
church and/or school and also the horse riders and dog walkers that regularly use
South St.
CSS Policy 10 proposes limited development in villages and, considering the immediate
vicinity of 3 South St, with a new house being constructed on one side and a proposal
for another new dwelling on the other side, can this really be considered as "limited
development" ... especially within a Conservation Area??"
4 Park Close
"The grounds for this objection primarily relate to North Northamptonshire Core Spatial
Strategy Policy 13: General Sustainable Development Principles.
Our property, 4 Park Close, lies to the rear of the site of the proposed new detached
dwelling. We have lived at 4 Park Close for 26 years.
We moved to Isham from a local town in order to benefit from the enhanced amenities
afforded by village life. Our understanding was that as Isham was in a conservation
area the existing amenities of the village would be protected. We have enjoyed
uninterrupted views to the rear of our property for 26 years as did the previous owner of
the property and in fact this was a deciding factor for us in choosing to live in Isham and
thereby paying the additional premium that a property in Isham would attract.
The proposed building of a two storey house would mean that our house and garden
would be directly overlooked. The plot on which our house lies and the plots of our
immediate neighbours in Park Close are significantly smaller than those to our rear in
South Street. We would therefore be disproportionately disadvantaged by any
development which resulted in our houses being overlooked and/or by remedial
measures.
Several years ago we were invited to comment on proposals to crown a large tree
which was located in the garden of No 3 South Street on the basis that the tree had
become dangerous. It would appear that in the end this tree was in fact removed
altogether, so we have already lost the amenity of one tall tree from our immediate
vicinity. With the removal of this tree the houses in South Street now have unrestricted
views into the bedrooms at the rear of our property.
We fully agree with the reservations which have already been expressed by Highways
and by the Parish Council in relation to access. As Isham residents who regularly walk
around the village, we fully share their concerns about safety to pedestrians and to
people driving in both directions along South Street.
From a process point of view, given the numbers of people living in South Street and
Green Lane who would potentially be impacted by people trying to park near the
Planning Committee
30 April 2014
4 of 105
proposed new dwelling as well as people trying to access it by car, we are surprised
that the distribution list for notification of planning proposals for the proposed new
dwelling at No 3 South Street was not considerably wider.
This proposal talks of a shared driveway ...at the moment for access by the family at
number 3 South Street. What happens in the future with regards to parking when they
decide to sell it on, as in my mind this is a strong possibility with the prices of houses in
Isham at a premium?
Living at 4 Park Close we have been subjected to the extensions carried by Mr Coles a
few years ago at 3 South Street. At that time I could not object as my neighbours at
that time would not join me in objecting. This meant that I was overlooked by 2
bedrooms and a bathroom not many metres from my bedroom. That however is bye the
bye.
When we objected to the proposed building adjacent to 3 South Street on
WP/2013/0593, we were informed by yourselves that Planning Permission had been
refused on the grounds of overdevelopment and safety of users of the public highway.
The planning application was also deemed to be contrary to Policy 13 D.H.I.N. of the
Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy - What Differs Now ?
The height of the building needs to be high enough so as not to impede the low winter
sun that we now enjoy in our gardens.
When you speak of overdevelopment Mr Coles has already extended his own cottage
by I think 100% and he has also developed a rather large property to his right....and he
now wishes to build another one to his left - where have all the gardens gone?
This proposal I feel must have the same response as your last decision. That the
refusal be upheld by yourselves as decided at your Council meeting. I would therefore
ask that another site meeting takes place, and I would like to be notified when this is to
take place, also that if it goes to Committee that we the residents of Park Close are
notified of this also."
6 Park Close
"I live at 6 Park Close Isham, immediately to the rear of the site of the proposed new
detached dwelling in the garden of 3 South Street Isham. I believe that the use of this
garden plot for building would constitute overdevelopment within a conservation area
and it would impact on my quality of life as regards loss of light, loss of outlook, noise
and reduction of enjoyment of the amenity of living in a conservation area.
I am also very concerned that the impact of further development on this site would
prejudice highway safety, particularly in relation to access to the site by car and also the
inevitable increase in street parking.
In January 2014 the Planning Committee rejected the plan for a single two storey house
on the basis of
- Perceived overdevelopment of the site which would be unacceptable to the amenities
of the occupiers of nearby properties
- Detrimental to the safety and convenience of users of the highway
Planning Committee
30 April 2014
5 of 105
- Contrary to Policy 13 of the NNCSS
Recent plans relate to a proposed single one storey building on the site with some
additional minor amendments to the previous plans. Potentially this will be viewed as a
more reasonable and more proportionate development which would be much less likely
to disadvantage neighbours, however I would respectfully suggest that this is not the
case.
The proposed height of the roof for this ONE storey building is less than one metre
lower than the height of the roof of the adjacent TWO storey building at 3 South Street.
I would have expected particularly in a conservation area that the height of proposed
new buildings would be proportionate to the overall size of the building particularly when
this directly impacts on the amenities enjoyed by nearby residents, but this is not so in
this case. From the perspective of the affected houses in Park Close, there would still
be a potential loss of light to our gardens especially in winter months, as observed at
the site visit in January 2014, and our current pleasant outlook would still be replaced
by an expanse of tiled roof.
The road is particularly narrow in the direct vicinity of 3 South Street. It is difficult to
envisage how a vehicle approaching the site would manage to make a very tight turn
into the site safely, particularly if two cars were parked in the shared drive.
As there is no continuous footpath at that point, the situation would potentially be very
hazardous for pedestrians and in particular for children, particularly as it appears
inevitable that any building works would result in additional street parking in the vicinity.
I fully agree with the concerns which have already been expressed by the Parish
Council and other objectors in this respect."
Applicant's Representations/Statements:
Below is a statement that my client would like put on the file and also addressed to the
Committe members prior to consideration.
Dear Councillors,
My wife and I would wish to submit the following information to the Committee for due
consideration in support of our planning application WP/2014/0059.
My wife and I have lived in Isham village for approaching 20 years now, and I have
family connections in the village going back much further than that.
During our period of residence here, we have raised a family of three children (19, 17 &
9 years of age) all of which have attended to village primary school and have been fully
engaged with all the activities on offer within a small rural village.
Now that our elder children are growing up they have commenced the process of trying
to start up a home of their own, and would have ideally like to live in the village where
they reside now and have grown up in, but unfortunately due to the fact that Isham
village has no real affordable housing stock & almost no social housing provision, their
search has proved to be an impossible dream.
Planning Committee
30 April 2014
6 of 105
This has resulted in our eldest child now moving out of the village in order to start a life
of her own.
More recently, my elderly father (77) has found it difficult to cope with living on his own
and we have taken the family decision for him to move in with us in the near future,
rather that considering a care home placement, consequently our current house (3
South Street) is at its very maximum occupancy level.
Hence the reasoning behind our planning application. We also have a daughter with
learning difficulties who will always need help and support in order to live
independently.
With a dwelling next door this would allow us to provide that help and support without
looking for other external resources to provide this assistance.
Being able to build a dwelling will allow us to support the growing needs of our family
while still maintaining a life of our own and allowing our father and daughter to have
some independence.
We respect the issues and concerns that have been raised by the last application, and
we have done our best to make sure all of these have been addressed in our revised
application, given fact the Planning Officer recommended approval previously. The
highways authority also reviewed and gave guidance as to how access would need to
be improved - which we adhered to fully.
Although we have built an extension on our original home some 10 years ago we have
not developed any of the site.
However our next door neighbour sold some land next to us which some people may
believe to have once been part of our property but has nothing to do with our land. We
currently have a plot size of approximately a quarter of an acre and so will leave us with
plenty of garden space.
We would be happy to provide any other supporting information should you require it.
We are delivering this statement in this way rather than attending the committee
meeting as we find it difficult to arrange child care and appropriate supervision for our
daughter.
Yours faithfully
Jonathan & Linda Coles
Previous Committee Report 26th March 2014
This application is referred to the Planning Committee at the request of the Parish
Council who also request a visit from the Site Viewing Group. Also this application has
attracted objections from third parties.
PROPOSAL AND DESCRIPTION OF SITE:
As described above.
Planning Committee
30 April 2014
7 of 105
The application site is currently the side garden to no. 3 South Street and lies within the
Conservation Area and is on the north side of South Street. The residential properties
of nos. 4, 5 and 6 Park Close lie to the north of the site, and no. 1a South Street is
located to the west of the site. A stonewall runs along its boundary with South Street
and wooden fencing runs along its western and northern boundaries. Several mature
trees are located across the site, but are largely confined to its perimeter. Levels
across the site are generally level; however, the ground levels of the properties to the
west (side) and north (rear) are noticeably higher.
Planning permission is being sought to erect a single storey two bedroom detached
bungalow with an integral garage for one vehicle. The proposed dwelling is to be faced
in locally sourced stone with brick detailing around the windows and doors and tiled in
natural slate. The property is L-shaped with gable ends and no dormers or roof lights
proposed in its roof space. Ground to ridge height is approximately 5.3 m. Two parking
spaces (excluding the garage) are to be provided on site with a turning area to permit
vehicles entering onto South Street in a forward gear. Access to the site will be shared
with no. 3 South Street; the access point being re-modelled to include 0.6 m high
boundary walls to the Highway Authority's recommendations to control the position of
vehicles leaving and entering the site.
The approximate roof height of the previous scheme (WP/2013/0593/F) which was
refused was 6.4 m when compared to that of the existing property, 3 South Street,
which is 1.15m lower. This latest scheme proposes a final roof ridge height of
approximately 5.3m, thus representing a reduction of approximately 1.1m such that the
proposed roof will be 0.35m below the existing property. For reference the final roof
ridge heights above Ordnance Survey Sea Level are quoted below:
3 South Street = 76.85m
Proposed under WP/2013/0593/F = 78.00m (1.15m ABOVE)
Proposed under WP/2014/0059/F = 76.50m (0.35m BELOW)
Total reduction in height between the 2014 and 2013 schemes is 1.5m (LOWER)
NB: At the 22nd January 2014 Planning Committee, a previous planning application
(Reference: WP/2013/0593/F) for a larger scheme on this site was refused. This latest
planning application, for a smaller scheme, has been submitted by the applicant to
hopefully address the refusal reasons issued by the 22nd January 2014 Planning
Committee. In advance of expected objections citing overdevelopment and highway
safety the applicant was invited to further amend this 2014 planning application, by
reducing the height of the proposed dwelling still further. An amended scheme was
duly submitted and consulted upon.
Anecdotally, the refused 1989 proposal consisted of a 4 bedroom two storey detached
house with a detached garage set to the rear of the proposed house.
RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY:
BW/1989/0244
Erection of new house with domestic garage - refused
TCON/2010/0009 Works to Willow Tree - agreed
WP/1992/0118
First floor extension to side of house - AC
WP/2001/0056
Two storey extension and garage - AC
WR/1959/0116
Conversion of barn into garage - approved
WP/2013/0593
Erection of a new detached dwelling - amended - refused
Planning Committee
30 April 2014
8 of 105
NATIONAL GUIDANCE, DEVELOPMENT PLAN POLICY AND SUPPLEMENTARY
PLANNING DOCUMENTS/GUIDANCE
National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF)
North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy (NNCSS)
Policy 1 - Strengthening the Network of Settlements
Policy 9 - Distribution and Location of Development
Policy 13 - General Sustainable Development Principles
Policy 14 - Energy Efficiency and Sustainable Construction
Wellingborough Local Plan
Policy G4 - Village Policy Lines
Supplementary Planning Guidance:
IV: Planning Out Crime
V: Parking
Supplementary Planning Document:
- Biodiversity
- Sustainable Design
- Trees and Landscape
- Northamptonshire Minerals and Waste Development Framework - Development and
Implementation Principles
SUMMARY OF REPLIES TO CONSULTATIONS/REPRESENTATIONS RECEIVED:
1. Isham Parish Council - objects
- SVG is requested
- Access
- Are very concerned regarding safety to road users and pedestrians in respect of
vehicular access and egress from the site.
- The road is of restricted width at this point and is not wide enough for two vehicles.
- The footpath is quite narrow at this point.
- The proposal retains trees/bushes in the splay line which would restrict views and
therefore be hazardous.
- The proposed access would have very restricted views of approaching traffic
especially from the West direction and would be extremely hazardous exacerbated by
the bend in the road.
- Vehicle entry into the proposed access from a West direction, if needed it was
possible, would be extremely difficult for a vehicle and appears as though a number of
manoeuvres would be necessary to gain access.
- A proper calibrated vehicular tracking plan would have to demonstrate this.
- The proposed access is restricted by low walls either side.
- Outline permission (WP/2013/0299/O) has already been granted for a single storey
property diagonally opposite this proposed entrance and the access for this has not yet
been agreed but will only exacerbate the problem.
- The proposed access uses the existing hard standing this would result in the existing
property having to use the road for parking when vehicles are not in the garage.
- There would be no off-road parking for visitors to the existing property as the existing
hard standing is to be used as an access to the proposed property.
- Vehicles already park in this area restricting access; any further development would
make the situation worse and almost impossible for the access of emergency vehicles.
- No proposal is made where bins could be placed so that they did not cause
obstruction and hazards either when being stored on site or waiting collection.
Planning Committee
30 April 2014
9 of 105
- Conservation Area
- The proposal is within the village Conservation Area and in our view is an
overdevelopment of the site and not conducive with the aims and objectives of such.
- The original property was nicely spaced on a reasonable plot, permission has already
been given for a new property on the other side of it which is currently under
construction, if permission were given fro this application the resultant effect would now
be three properties with little garden retained on any, which does not reflect the aims of
the Conservation Area.
- We would be concerned over maintaining the integrity of the historic wall between the
proposed building and the neighbouring property.
- Currently the floor level proposed is at a much lower level than the existing; the
historic wall is unlikely to have a substantial foundation and is likely to be affected.
- Overdevelopment
- This proposal is an overdevelopment of the site, little garden is left and has a
detrimental effect on the area and of its present open nature.
- This proposal has a detrimental effect on its neighbours by the site being
overdeveloped.
- Whilst the height of this proposal has been reduced a little [1.5m] it will still be
overbearing on its neighbours, it is apparent that the height is designed as such that
rooms can be easily fitted into the roof space at a later date.
- Our understanding of the comments made regarding the last proposal was that any
building on this site should have a floor level similar to the existing and it is noted that
this proposal is considerably above that level.
2. Northamptonshire County Council Highway Authority, recommendations - To ensure that highway safety is maintained, this authority recommends to the
planning authority that the highway standards and planning conditions set out in the
NCC document 'Highway Authority Standing Advice', as applicable, be applied to this
planning application.
- As it is intended that vehicular access will be shared with 3 South Street Isham the
means of access must be laid out as a shared private drive having a width of no less
than 4.5m.
- As South Street is a minor residential street it is appropriate for vehicle to vehicle
visibility of 2m x 25m to be provided and maintained in both directions at the point of
access.
- Pedestrian to vehicle visibility of 2.4m x 2.4m (2m x 2m where adequate turning
facilities are provided within the site) above a height of 0.6m must be provided and
maintained on both sides of the point of access to the site.
- The vehicular crossing into the site must be suitably widened and highway surfaces
refurbished in accordance with the specification of the Local Highway Authority and
subject to a licence/agreement under the Highways Act 1980.
- As proposed, vehicular access to the new dwelling will rely upon co-operation
between the occupiers of the two dwellings to ensure that the shared part of the means
of access remaining clear of parked vehicles. It is suggested that, to ensure adequate
rights are held to in perpetuity, a suitable legal agreement is prepared to indentify and
control use of the shared area of driveway.
3. Borough Council of Wellingborough, Conservation Officer - The height of the building in the current plans appears to be acceptable now in relation
Planning Committee
30 April 2014
10 of 105
to its neighbours.
- Please attach an extra condition to the consent covering submission of full details of
stone work coursing and pointing (sample panel required), windows and doors including
garage door, rainwater goods (metal type required) and a specification for permeable
paving.
4. Borough Council of Wellingborough, Landscape Officer - no comment received at
time of writing.
5. Northamptonshire Archaeological Advisor - The site lies in an area of possible Romano-British occupation; finds of pottery have
been recorded to the north and to the south of the site, and a number of ditches
identified to the south west which were also of Roman date. To the south east the
earthwork remains of medieval settlement are recorded. There is therefore the potential
for archaeological remains to survive on the application site, albeit truncated by more
recent activity.
- The NPPF, in paragraphs 128 & 129, stresses the importance of pre application
discussions in order to assess the significance of potential heritage assets. Normally
the assessment would take the form of an evaluation prior to determination; however, in
this case a condition for a programme of archaeological works will be acceptable. .
- The proposed application will have a detrimental impact upon any archaeological
deposits present. This does not however represent an over-riding constraint on the
development provided that adequate provision is made for the investigation and
recording of any remains that are affected. In order to secure this please attach a
condition for an archaeological programme of works as per NPPF paragraph 141 to any
permission granted in respect of this application.
- Our standard condition is as follows:
- Condition:
- No development shall take place within the area indicated until the applicant, or their
agents or successors in title, has secured the implementation of a programme of
archaeological work in accordance with a written scheme of investigation which has
been submitted by the applicant and approved in writing by the local planning authority.
Reason:
- To ensure that features of archaeological interest are properly examined and
recorded, in accordance with NPPF paragraph 141.
6. BCW Environment Protection Officer - an appropriate environmental risk assessment
should be carried out or a condition is included in any approval requiring a scheme to
be submitted to the satisfaction of the LPA.
7. NCC SUDS - no response received at time of writing.
8. North Northants JPU - no response received at time of writing.
9. Neighbours - objections (x 2) received from 5 Park Close and The Brambles (Green
Lane) - We note that a Planning Application has been made for the construction of a dwelling
at the above and wish to lodge our objection on the basis of the following:- We understand this proposal is in the conservation area and are most surprised that
Planning Committee
30 April 2014
11 of 105
the Design & Conservation Officer seems to accept that the invasion of the
Conservation area is quite acceptable, it seems to us that all of the available land in the
Conservation area is gradually being in filled with housing i.e. All Saints House,
opposite All Saints House, the other side of 3 South Street to name a recent few. Are
we to assume he is quite happy with this state of affairs; the meaning of the word
Conservation is 'the action of conserving' however it seems more like the action of
changing.
- What was a property centrally placed on a plot is now likely to have 3 properties
wedged on with little garden left for any of them and consequently the whole of the
Conservation area is gradually being allowed to be in filled with housing, where will it
stop?
- We have particular concerns over the situation with potential vehicles at the junction of
Green Lane with South Street. We note the proposed access to the property which is
plainly ridiculous and dangerous being located in the narrowest section of road where it
is obviously virtually impossible to turn into the entrance from one direction, adjacent to
bend with a narrow footpath and using the existing properties hard standing which will
inevitably mean parking in the road.
- Currently this area becomes constricted because of on street parking this proposal will
inevitably make the situation much worse and inaccessible for emergency services and
the local authority waste collection.
- Permission has already been given for a new bungalow on the opposite side of the
road, we understand the access proposals have not yet been determined by the local
authority but this is only going to worsen the situation.
- With the proposals is an alleged street view drawing which can only be described as
unrealistic, this is not a view that can be obtained anywhere from a street view as it has
been prepared from an elevated view.
- Even from this angle the 'bungalow' still looks as big as the house to the right of it, we
can only image what it may look like from the rear neighbours perspective.
- My property, 5 Park Close, is immediately to the rear of the site of the proposed new
detached dwelling. The plot on which my house lies and that of my immediate
neighbours in Park Close are significantly smaller than the plots to our rear in South
Street.
- We would therefore be disproportionately disadvantaged by this proposed
development.
- Policy G12 [NB: This policy is not a saved policy] of Wellingborough District Council's
Local Plan indicates that proposed developments which do not harmonise with the
Conservation Area and preserve or enhance the special qualities of the Conservation
Areas and its setting would be rejected.
- The building of a new property on land belonging to the already extended existing
property at 3 South Street would result in one large and one relatively large property
with disproportionately small gardens.
- To the other side of No: 3 South Street is another uncompleted large property, which
is also being built on what was the garden of No: 2.
- Furthermore, there is the impact of a relatively recent planning decision to allow a
significant extension to No 1A South Street, the neighbouring house to the proposed
new dwelling. No 1A South Street runs the full length of my neighbour's property from
front to back and tall conifers now border the two properties.
- As a result my property is no longer overlooked by the extension, but at the expense
of considerable loss of light to my garden.
- I would contend that this new application would cause over development of this area.
- The height of the roof of the proposed building will be detrimental to the residents of 4,
Planning Committee
30 April 2014
12 of 105
5 and 6 Park Close for a number of reasons.
- My property and my neighbours would suffer another loss of natural light both in
summer and winter.
- During the winter when the sun is significantly lower in the sky this will be very
noticeable if the new build goes ahead.
- Sunlight is already reduced, as the sun moves to the right of our properties due to very
much higher No: 1A.
- The only uninterrupted sunlight is when the sun moves across the existing garden of
No: 3 South Street.
- If the proposed build goes ahead the roof ridge is so high it will block sunlight except
perhaps at the vey height of summer.
- Another cause of concern is that the height of the roof of the proposed new property
could mean, that at a future date, further development may take place.
- At the moment I have a very pleasant outlook to the rear of my property which will be
replaced by a large expanse of slate roof which is a depressing thought.
- I moved to my small home in a Conservation Area setting specifically to enjoy the
quality of life linked with a village setting and a pleasant rural outlook.
- The proposed dwelling will add to the destruction of all the reasons people wish to live
in Isham that being living in a village environment.
- A further aspect of this proposal for consideration is the impact on the immediate
neighbourhood of protracted building work.
- During the summer months when residents are trying to enjoy some peace and quiet
in their gardens, noise from the building work itself can be very intrusive as can ancillary
noise such as radio playing by the builders.
- There is also the visual impact of ongoing building work which takes away from the
attractiveness of the village.
- In the case of the proposed development, this would be the third major building work
carried out by the same self builder in the same area over a continuous period of many
years.
- The trees in Isham significantly enhance the charm of the village and the outlook of its
residents.
- Although the detailed site plan indicates which trees are to be removed or relocated, it
is difficult for those of us who have benefited for many years from the outlook provided
by the trees in No 3 to be able to understand the extent to which our outlook will be
affected.
- Without the benefit of a site visit it is not clear which of the trees marked on the plan
are the ones which currently enhance the outlook from the houses and gardens to the
rear.
- Policy G1 [NB: This policy is not a saved policy] refers to a requirement for proposals
for development to have satisfactory means of access, provide adequate parking,
servicing and manoeuvring facilities.
- It also indicates that they should not have an adverse impact on the road network and
not prejudice highway safety.
- I support all the objections already raised by The Parish Council, the Local Highways
Authority [NB: The Highway Authority have NOT objected to this latest proposal] and
other objectors highlighting concerns for the safety of drivers and pedestrians in relation
to this planning application.
- The proposed plans to ensure adequate parking for the proposed new property do not
acknowledge that the use of a shared driveway to access the new property would
impact on the parking space currently available for the existing dwelling at 3 South
Street which would appear to be usually occupied by 2 large cars.
Planning Committee
30 April 2014
13 of 105
- It appears inevitable that there will be a significant increase in cars parked on the
street which will further exacerbate the already dangerous access to and egress both
from the proposed new property and potentially from 3 South Street itself.
- The site under question is on a very narrow bend with traffic in both directions and
restricted pavement access for pedestrians. Isham residents habitually walk in this
area often accompanied by small children and/or dogs.
- The proposal of a shared access must also be a subject of concern because of the
possibility of either the present and/or proposed properties being sold sometime in the
future.
- I choose to live in Isham to benefit from the enhanced amenities afforded by village life
and paid a premium for this benefit.
- My understanding is that Isham was and still is a conservation area thus existing
amenities of the village would be protected.
- A deciding factor in the purchase of my property was the fact my property's rear
garden afforded me some privacy.
- My solicitor at the time of purchase pointed out that Isham was a conservation area
and that this would mean permission would have to be sought to remove trees and
would also mean there would not be building in gardens.
- I also understood the present Government was against 'garden grabs' building.
ASSESSMENT:
The material planning considerations are considered to be:
- Compliance with policy
- Impact on the conservation area
- Impact on the character and appearance of the area
- Impact on neighbour's amenities
- Highway safety
- Archaeology
- Crime and disorder
- Biodiversity
- Other matters
Compliance with policy
With regards to the Borough of Wellingborough Local Plan, Isham is defined as a
Restricted Infill village by Policy G4 and it states that development will be granted
planning permission if it is within the policy line and if it would not have an adverse
effect on the size, form character and setting of the village and its environs. Policy 13
(General Sustainable Development Principles) of the North Northamptonshire Core
Spatial Strategy (NNCSS) echoes the thrust of Policy G4 as it requires development
should be of a high standard of design, respect and enhance the character of its
surroundings.
Whilst the NPPF encourages the use of previously developed land (PDL), it excludes
residential garden land from its definition of PDL, however, this does not specifically
imply that development should be refused if the development as a whole accords with
the presumption in favour of approving sustainable development where it balances the
economic, environmental and social roles of the planning system. It should be noted
that the there are NO prohibitive Local Plan polices restricting this type of development,
and the principle of erecting a new build on a residential curtilage has been established
by the neighbouring new build known as no. 3a South Street.
Planning Committee
30 April 2014
14 of 105
The NPPF, in paragraph 60, is quite clear in stating that planning decisions should not
attempt to impose architectural styles or tastes and they should not stifle innovation,
originality or initiative through unsubstantiated requirements to conform to certain
development forms or styles. It is, however, proper to seek to promote or reinforce
local distinctiveness. Due to the more recent new builds and the eclectic nature of the
original homes, then it is considered that there is no strong local distinctiveness and the
proposed scheme offers a distinctive design of a standard befitting the area.
The development proposal is within the village policy line and the Conservation Area
and it is opined to not be harmful to its surrounding environs or adversely affecting the
character and appearance of the area as its massing, layout and appearance has been
sympathetically designed to be respectful to the existing building.
It is therefore thought that this proposal is in accordance with Policy 13 (h) of the
NNCSS and Policy G4 of the Local Plan. However, other more specific aspects of
policy in relation to the current application are examined below.
Impact on the conservation area
The application site lies within the village Conservation Area towards it southern
boundary. The views expressed by this Council's Conservation Officer are quite clear
in that he finds the proposal acceptable and would require conditions to control the
choice of external materials; e.g. stone work coursing/pointing, windows, doors, garage
doors and rainwater goods. This approach is deemed to be acceptable as it will ensure
the proposed building's external appearance would be to of a high standard and would
not be detrimental the Conservation Area's general character and appearance.
The comments relating to street scene views are noted and in response the applicant's
agent has stated that the views give a sufficient representation of the massing and
relationship of the buildings, taking into account the existing and proposed planting.
The applicant's agent has gone on to state that given the contrasting angles of the
proposed and existing properties, then in his professional opinion he cannot see a
better way to represent them in the manner that the objectors/LPA indicate. With
reference to the submitted drawings and their interpretation of them when on site, it is
opined that the details afford the author the ability to deduce the relative massings of
the buildings to conclude that the street scene would not be significantly or
demonstrably harmed.
Accordingly, is considered that the proposal will not detrimentally affect the
conservation area or be in conflict with Policy 13 (o) of the North Northamptonshire
Core Spatial Strategy.
Impact on the character and appearance of the area
The North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy Policy 13 (h) says that new
development should be of a high standard of design, architecture and landscaping,
respect and enhance the character of its surroundings. Local Plan Policy G4 also
requires new development to respect the surrounding style. This principle is also
reflected in NPPF where in considering the design of the built environment development
should contribute positively to making places better for people, and this concept is also
reflected in the guidance contained in that of the SPD: Sustainable Design.
Planning Committee
30 April 2014
15 of 105
The preceding section has previously dealt with the issue of character and appearance.
However, the objectors draw reference to the amount of garden land the proposal
would deliver and how this impacts upon an area's character. The NPPF, Development
Plan Policies and Planning Guidance do not set out or specify how big residential
gardens ought to be. It is opined that the amount of garden space is to be assessed on
a case by case basis. Based upon the relative sizes of the proposed gardens, (some
9m to 11m in depth), it is opined that sufficient garden space is being provided and it is
not considered that all existing and future occupiers will demand expansive gardens for
their own particular needs.
The infilling of plots of land with new homes does provide a benefit to the local
community in as far as providing a new home as the Coalition Government pronounce
that there is an under provision of housing and is seeking to boost its supply. This
scheme would help to address this situation. With regards to over development, this
density of housing would appear to be reflective elsewhere in the village and is not
opined to be of such a density that would be considered to be too high.
If this planning application were to be approved by Planning Committee, it does not
follow that all future planning applications in the village of Isham for new homes will be
granted planning permission, as every case will be judged on its merits.
For the reasons set out in the preceding section, the amended scheme is not thought to
be in conflict with Policy 13 of the NNCSS and Policy G4 of the Local Plan.
Impact on Neighbour's Amenities
Policy 13 (l) of the North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy states that new
development should not result in an unacceptable impact on the amenities of
neighbouring properties or the wider area by reason of loss of light or overlooking.
Paragraph 56 of the NPPF states that: good design should contribute positively to
making places better for people.
The greatly revised proposed development is opined not to harm the living conditions of
the surrounding properties as the final height of the building has been reduced in height
by the order of 1.5m and it is to a bungalow with no first floor. This aspect can be
controlled by an appropriate planning condition. Accordingly, it is not perceived that this
development proposal would cause any loss of privacy or overlooking.
Due to the distance of approximately 20 m at the closest point between the proposed
development and the properties of Park Close, the proposed building's height and its
ground level position relative to the surrounding ground levels, then it is considered that
the neighbours would not experience any demonstrable or significant loss of light or
outlook. Indeed, a feature of the Conservation Area that is opined to give it its special
qualities is the presence of natural slate roofs - which this scheme seeks to provide.
It is therefore opined that the scheme would not be contrary to Policy 13 (a, j and l) of
the North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy.
Highway safety
Policy 13 (d) of the North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy states that new
development should have a satisfactory means of access and provide for parking,
servicing and manoeuvring in accordance with adopted standards and Policy 13 (n)
Planning Committee
30 April 2014
16 of 105
goes on to say that development should not have an adverse impact on the highway
network and will not prejudice highway safety.
Many comments have been lodged with regards to the provision of off/on-street
parking, access arrangements, highway safety and capacity and vehicle to pedestrian
visibility.
On matters such as these, the professional opinion of the Local Highway Authority (HA)
is sought as it is considered that they are best placed to provide expert technical
recommendations, including those already consented upon which they have already
considered and commented upon, on the proposed development's impacts upon
highway capacity and safety.
The submitted drawings do provide the ability to be able quantify, measure and scale
parking provision, vehicle tracking and access arrangements. With appropriate
planning permission conditions and informatives the HA do not object to the proposal.
In their professional capacity, the HA are satisfied that the new access, and the traffic
associated with it, will not pose significant concerns to them so as to advise the local
planning authority that this scheme be refused.
With regards to on-site parking provision, the new proposal offers 2 parking spaces plus
a garage, with a turning area, and 2 parking spaces plus a double garage and turning
area for the existing property. Based upon the scale of the proposed dwelling (2 bed
bungalow), it is opined that the parking provision is reasonable and in kind with the
scale of development. Much comment has been received to conclude that there is a
perceived impression that the future occupiers of the proposed dwelling and the current
occupiers of 3 South Street may attract many more visitors to their homes than the
normal quota of visitors attracted to other homes surrounding this development. No
evidence has been produced or received to demonstrate that visitor numbers to the
proposed development would be overly excessive or greater than what the
neighbouring properties receive. It is opined that the addition of a single 2 bed
bungalow, with on site parking for 2 cars, would not cause a massive or significant
increase in road traffic to give concern that highway safety will be grossly and severely
impacted.
Furthermore, the Highway Code sets out various laws to motorists on how to park their
vehicles safely on the highway so as not to cause safety issues to other motorists, and
it is not for the planning system to enforce such matters.
The Highways Authority (HA) specified what access arrangements the applicant should
adhere to ensure to highway safety is not compromised. These measures have been
incorporated into the proposal and the use of planning conditions is considered to be a
reasonable and proportion approach to secure the delivery of such arrangements.
Accordingly, the proposal is considered not to be contrary to Policy 13 (d and n) of the
NNCSS.
Archaeology
The comments of the Archaeological Advisor are noted and due to her concerns then it
is considered appropriate that a suitably worded planning condition is included in any
planning permission that may be forthcoming to ensure that archaeological assets are
Planning Committee
30 April 2014
17 of 105
safeguarded in accordance with paragraph 141 of the NPPF, as this is deemed to a
material consideration.
Crime and disorder
Policy 13 (b) of the North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy states that
development should seek to design out antisocial behaviour, crime and reduce the fear
of crime by applying the principles of the Secured By Design scheme. The above policy
is predated by adopted Supplementary Planning Guidance 'Planning Out Crime' which
gives detail to the intent of spatial strategy policy.
No pertinent crime and disorder issues have been identified within the scope of the
application.
Biodiversity
No biodiversity issues of any material significance have been identified within the scope
of the application.
Other matters
The request for an appropriate environment risk assessment is noted and will be
secured via a suitably worded planning condition.
It should be noted that this Council's Landscape Officer has not offered any objection to
this proposal with regard to its impact upon trees and the submitted landscaping
scheme.
Indeed, the applicant discussed the development's impact upon the
conservation area's trees with the Landscape Officer prior to the submission of the
application and the Landscape Officer was satisfied with the applicant's proposals to
safeguard trees.
The case officer is satisfied that the submitted drawings indicate clearly which trees are
to be retained and which are to be removed.
The planning system is not the vehicle for controlling nuisance from construction works
or working hours as this is within the remit of the powers invested in this Council's
Environment Protection Service. The applicant has firmly stated in their Sustainability
Appraisal that a contractor will be appointed to manage a team of specialist
subcontractors to construct the building and they will work within the Considerate
Construction Code.
The right to a view is not afforded any protection by the planning system.
The planning system does not exist to protect the private interests on one person
against another such as the impact upon property values.
The planning system does not exist to determine the speed by which developments are
constructed.
The status of a conservation area does not imply that all future development, what ever
its scale, will be declined; each and every case would be assessed on its own merits.
Furthermore, the conservation status implies that all future development proposals
would be considered more stringently in their design credentials to a higher degree than
would be applied to development outside the conservation area. It is considered that
Planning Committee
30 April 2014
18 of 105
this proposal does offer a high degree of design aesthetics fit for the conservation area.
Conclusion
It is considered that there are no detecting factors which should be accorded sufficient
weight to withhold the grant of planning permission.
RECOMMENDATION:
Grant planning permission subject to the following conditions:
Conditions/Reasons:
1. The development shall be begun not later than the expiration of three years
beginning with the date of this permission.
2. Reason: Required to be imposed pursuant to S51 of the Planning and Compulsory
Purchase Act 2004.
3. No development shall take place until the applicant, or their agents or successors in
title, has secured the implementation of a programme of archaeological work in
accordance with a written scheme of investigation which has been submitted to and
approved in writing by the local planning authority. The approved details shall be
subsequently implemented prior to the commencement of development unless
otherwise agreed in writing by the local planning authority.
4. Reason: To ensure that features of archaeological interest are properly examined
and recorded, in accordance with National Planning Policy Framework Paragraph
141.
5. Prior to the commencement of development an Environmental Risk Assessment to
identify any contamination on the site shall be submitted to and approved in writing
by the local planning authority. If the Environmental Risk assessment identifies any
contamination, it shall contain measures for its remediation and the site shall be
remediated in accordance with the agreed scheme prior to first occupation unless
otherwise agreed in writing by the local planning authority.
6. Reason: To ensure that risks from contamination to the future users of the site and
neighbouring land are minimised, and to ensure that the development can be carried
out safely without unacceptable risk.
7. Representative samples/details of all external metal rainwater goods, windows,
doors, garage doors, stone work coursing and pointing and permeable paving shall
be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority before the
development is commenced. The development shall be carried out in accordance
with the approved details.
8. Reason: In the interests of preserving and enhancing the visual amenity of the
conservation area.
9. A scheme for screen fencing/walling shall be agreed with the local planning authority
before the start of construction. The agreed scheme shall be implemented to the
satisfaction of the local planning authority before the houses are occupied.
Planning Committee
30 April 2014
19 of 105
10. Reason: In the interests of amenity and privacy.
11. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the amended plans
(Reference numbers: ROC6401A, ROC6402A, and ROC6403A) deposited with the
local planning authority on 19th February 2014.
12. Reason: To ensure that the development is carried out in accordance with the
agreed amendments.
13. The shared private vehicular access must be laid out to a width of no less than 4.5
m.
14. Reason: In the interests of highway safety.
15. Pedestrian to vehicle visibility of 2.4 m x 2.4 m (2.0 m x 2.0 m where adequate
turning facilities are provided within the site) above a height of 0.6 m must be
provided and maintained on both sides of the point of access to the site.
16. Reason: In the interests of highway safety and to control the position of vehicles
entering and leaving the site.
17. The vehicular crossing into the site must be suitably widened and highway surfaces
refurbished in accordance with the specification of the Local Highway Authority and
subject to a licence/agreement under the Highways Act 1980.
19. Vehicle to vehicle visibility of 2m x 25m shall be permanently provided and
maintained in both directions at the point access.
21. Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General
Permitted Development) Order 1995 (or any order revoking, re-enacting or
modifying that Order) no extensions, garages, sheds or other buildings shall be
erected without express planning permission from the local planning authority, other
than those expressly authorised by this permission.
22. Reason: To protect residential amenities.
INFORMATIVE/S:
1. Pursuant to Section 38 (6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004, the
proposed development complies with the applicable development plan policies and
there are no other material considerations that would constitute sustainable grounds
for refusal. These include specifically the following policies:
North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy (NNCSS)
Planning Committee
30 April 2014
20 of 105
Policy G4 - Village Policy Lines.
2. In accordance with the provisions in the Town and Country Planning (Development
Management Procedure) (England) (Amendment No. 2) Order 2012 and pursuant to
paragraphs 186 and 187 of the National Planning Policy Framework, where possible
and feasible, either through discussions, negotiations or in the consideration and
assessment of this application and the accompanying proposals, the Council as the
local planning authority endeavoured to work with the applicant/developer in a
positive and proactive way to ensure that the approved development is consistent
with the relevant provisions in The Framework.
3. The applicant is advised that as the vehicular access to the new dwelling will rely
upon co-operation between the occupiers of the two dwellings to ensure that the
shared part of the means of access remaining clear of parked vehicles. The
applicant is advised that, to ensure that adequate rights are held to in perpetuity, a
suitable legal agreement is prepared to identify and control use of the shared area of
the driveway.
4. Prior to the commencement of any site works, all occupiers of potentially sensitive
properties surrounding the site should be notified in writing of the nature and duration
of works to be undertaken, and the name and address of a responsible person, to
whom enquiries/complaints should be directed.
5. The Public Health Act 1875 Town Improvement Clauses Act 1847 at S.64
Prior to occupation of the newly created premises(s), the street numbering for this
development must be agreed with the Street Naming and Numbering Officer. When
issued, the number allocated must be clearly displayed on the outside of the
property. Application forms for Street Naming and Numbering are available at
6. 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 Highways Regulation Team
Leader, Northamptonshire County Council, County Hall, George Row, Northampton,
NN1 1AS prior to any construction/excavation works within the public highway.
Planning Committee
30 April 2014
21 of 105
Planning Committee
30 April 2014
SITE VIEWING (Date of visit Tuesday 29th April 2014 at 10.40 a.m.)
Case Officer Mr Mike Kilpin
WP/2013/0674
Date received
Date valid
23 December 2013 23 December 2013
Overall Expiry Ward
23 March 2014 Castle
Parish
Wellingborough
Applicant Mr David Laight
Agent
Mr David Laight
Location Irthlingborough Grange Irthlingborough
Northamptonshire NN8 1RG
Road
Wellingborough
Proposal Outline planning application for residential development of up to 40
dwellings with all matters reserved. Means of access to be achieved via
new roads constructed within the 'Stanton Cross' development.
PLANNING HISTORY:
WP/2012/0402
Application withdrawn/undetermined
02.11.2012
Outline application for development of the site to retain the existing
dwelling and the erection of up to 10 dwellings within the site with all
matters reserved for future consideration except access
WP/2013/0674
Outline planning application for residential development of up to 40
dwellings with all matters reserved. Means of access to be achieved
via new roads constructed within the 'Stanton Cross' development.
WP/2012/0508
03.01.2013
Outline application for development of the site to retain the existing
dwelling and the erection of up to 4 dwellings within the site with all
matters reserved for future consideration except access.
WP/2008/0420
28.01.2009
Variation of conditions 9, 35, 43 and 44, deletion of condition 45 of
planning permission WP/2004/0600/O for the mixed use development
including 87 ha of residential development; B1, B2 and B8
development, new public transport links (buses), new and enhanced
walking and cycling routes and facilities, country park, neighbourhood
Planning Committee
30 April 2014
22 of 105
WP/2013/0674/OM
65.6m
HL
IRT
ING
B
G
OU
OR
H
A
RO
D
)
67.3m
Trac k
65.3m
Grange
Farm
The Old
Granary
ues
G
Iss
Irthlingborough Grange
k
ac
Tr
65.1m
B 571
64.1m
±
Built Environment
Scale:
1:2,500
© Crown Copyright
Cities Revealed
GetMapping PLC 1999
Legend
WP/2013/0674/OM - Irthlingborough Grange, Irthlingborough Rd, Wellingborough
centre, 2 secondary local centres, construction of access roads,
bridges and highway structures, footways, footpaths, bridleways; and
associated works and facilities
WP/1998/0099
05.08.1998
Change of use of agricultural barn to 4 no. holiday flats and 1 no.
managers dwelling with B1 office above
WP/1994/0202
22.06.1994
Open fronted single pitch barn
WP/1993/0463
Refused
01.12.1993
Conversion of existing barn to dwelling (retaining use of existing
block)
BW/1981/0074
11.03.1981
Temporary siting of caravan for residential use (permission expired
31/12/81)
WP/2000/0029
01.03.2000
Change of use of barn to B1 offices
WP/1991/0473
Refused
Conversion of barn to dwellinghouse
BW/1986/0714
18.12.1991
14.08.1986
Two pig buildings
WP/2004/0600
28.01.2008
Mixed use development including 87ha of residential development;
B1, B2 and B8 development, new public transport links (buses), new
and enhanced walking and cycling routes and facilities, Country Park,
Neighbourhood Centre, 2 Secondary local centres, construction of
access roads, bridges and highway structures, footways, footpaths,
bridleways; and associated works and facilities.
Site is within, but not part of application site of main WEAST consent WP/2004/0600/O.
Masterplan guidance does include guidance in respect of site. Site is next to
undetermined Reserved Matters application for AREA 16 - 170 dwelling units WP/2010/0347/RM.
PLANNING POLICY:
WEAST Masterplan 2004/6
WEAST Neighbourhood Centre Brief 2004
WEAST Neighbourhood Centre Urban Design Code
Planning Committee
30 April 2014
23 of 105
National Planning Policy Framework
Related Local Plan Policies.
CONSULTATION/S:
1. Anglian Water "There are assets owned by Anglian Water or those subject to an adoption agreement
within or close to the development boundary that may affect the
layout of the site. Anglian Water would ask that the following text be included within
your Notice should permission be granted.
Anglian Water has assets close to or crossing this site or there are assets subject to an
adoption agreement. Therefore the site layout should take this into account and
accommodate those assets within either prospectively adoptable highways or public
open space. If this is not practicable then the sewers will need to be diverted at the
developers cost under Section 185 of the Water Industry Act 1991. or, in the case of
apparatus under an adoption agreement, liaise with the owners of the apparatus. It
should be noted that the diversion works should normally be completed before
development can commence."
A condition is recommended "CONDITION
No development shall commence until a foul water strategy has been submitted to and
approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. No dwellings shall be occupied until
the works have been carried out in accordance with the foul water strategy so approved
unless otherwise approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.
REASON
To prevent environmental and amenity problems arising from flooding."
2. NCC Highways Use of road in proposal for Area 16 scheme is noted as is need for certain detailed
aspects to be modified.
3. Planning Policy Masterplan related considerations are noted, departure from which would need
justification in terms of changed circumstances.
4. Landscape Officer "A tree report has been submitted for the trees within the site boundary which does not
include those in the avenue which were surveyed previously.
The proposal indicates that the trees along the south west boundary would be retained,
although some have been recommended for removal because of their condition.
Replacement planting would be provided along the south east boundary for those to be
lost.
Planning Committee
30 April 2014
24 of 105
Although approximately two thirds of the existing trees within the site would be lost
potentially, the feature of the mature trees on the skyline which has always been
considered to be an important feature of the Stanton Cross development would remain
provided that the trees in the avenue are managed. Some of these are in need of
attention and some replacement planting should be secured."
5. Environment Agency - objects to scheme.
ASSESSMENT:
Site is with a large house and barns present. Access is via a tree lined drive declared
by NCC Highways as suitable to serve 5 dwelling units. Access to present proposal
would use a road related to the AREA 16 highway layout - included in application site.
WEAST Development Framework (adopted as SPG 2003) suggests that development
should maximise use of existing features (2.14). Figure 3.4 identifies Grange and trees
as key features. Grange and outbuildings are seen to of architectural significance.
Neighbourhood Centre brief (adopted as SPG in 2004 identifies Grange as important
and strongly encourages retention. It is the case, however, that the Grange has
deteriorated since those writings and applicant argues that building has never been put
forward for a listing assessment.
RECOMMENDATION:
Grant planning permission subject to Planning Agreement (106) and conditions.
Conditions/Reasons:
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 three years from the date of this permission; or
(b) the expiration of two years from the final approval of the reserved matters or, in
the case of approval on different dates, the final approval of the last such matter to
be approved.
2. Reason: Required to be imposed pursuant to Section 92 of the Town and Country
Planning Act 1990.
3. 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.
4. Reason: To secure satisfactorily planned development.
5. No development shall commence until a foul water strategy has been submitted to
and approved in writing by the local planning authority. No dwellings shall be
occupied until the works have been carried out in accordance with the foul water
strategy so approved unless otherwise approved in writing by the local planning
authority.
Planning Committee
30 April 2014
25 of 105
6. Reason: To prevent environmental and amenity problems arising from flooding.
7. This consent relates to Site Location Plan dated December 2013.
8. For plan identification purposes.
9. Highway conditions to follow.
10. Reason: Highway Reasons to follow.
INFORMATIVE/S:
Planning Committee
30 April 2014
26 of 105
Planning Committee
30 April 2014
Case Officer Mr Ola Duyile
Date received
Date valid
27 January 2014 4 February 2014
WP/2014/0029
Overall Expiry Ward
5 May 2014 Swanspool
Parish
Wellingborough
Applicant Mr John Harmon
Agent
Mr Eric Ellis
Location 38a British Rail Sports and Social Club Broad Green Wellingborough
Northamptonshire NN8 4LH
Proposal Demolition of existing building and other structures, construction of
proposed new residential scheme, comprising 30 no. care facility flats
(accessible from Gold Street/Broad Green), erection of a free-standing
office (Class B1) use together with parking provision and landscaping.
Amended Drawings and Additional Information. Additional Information
- Changes to the layout of the development including the creation of a
cycle path to Outlaw Lane; and setting back the building from the
boundaries.
PLANNING HISTORY:
WP/2014/0020
23.01.2014
Demolition of existing building and other structures, construction of
proposed new residential scheme in two blocks, comprising 30no.
care facility flats and 48no. affordable and retirement (accessible from
Gold Street/Broad Green) 1 and 2 bedroom apartments (accessible
from Knights Court); erection of a free-standing office (Class B1 use)
together with parking provision and landscaping
WP/2014/0030
proposed new residential scheme, comprising 48 no. affordable and
retirement apartments of 1 and 2 bedroomed flats (accessible from
Knights Court) with parking provision and landscaping. Additional
Information - changes to the layout of the development including the
creation of a cycle path to Outlaw Lane; and setting back the building
from the boundaries.
Planning Committee
30 April 2014
27 of 105
21
a
23
PH
82.0m
9a
24
9
5
4
81.7m
T
57
13
11
O
EE
32
4a
36
G
LD
R
62
33
CR
Ward Bd y
a
11
ST
34
21
40
5
32
AD
ARRO WDEN RO
WP/2014/0029/FM
1t
o3
50
45
NO
H
RT
2
1
80.8m
RE
ST
38
ET
11
91
5t
12
82
35
o1
2 to
ESS
CO
09
o1
T
33a
UR
33b
)
1t
10
79.6m
3
1a
36
35
34
41 5
3
to
39
Hom-i-lea
74
to
78
37
to
77
to
87
62
to
72
61
to
71
37
50
to
60
65
to
75
38
36
Club
39
Palmer
Court
23
49
to
59
1 to 25
A
38
a
73
to
77
38
to 41
42to
51
Hatton House
44
to
48 53
to
63
43
to
47
Hatton
Gardens
27
3
1t
11
TS
23
o1
I GH
33
KN
A
2
PH
39a
74.1m
42
8
T
OU
Posts
N
LA
LAW
E
45
4
CR
ED
an
d
W
ar
d
Bd
y
10
N
OU T
E
LAN
LAW
2
1
51
Posts
PH
15
TCB
14
EN
Broad Green
49
GR E
EE
AD
O
GR
48
BRO
BR
AD
53
W
HA
ON
RT
OS
CL
E
80.2m
BR
DG
RE
76.5m
EN
56
OA
Garage
Garage
War Meml
18
15
16
17
14
Posts
Posts
10 to
Garage
12
t
57
24
26
1
o6
22
11
9
1:1,250
Legend
© Crown Copyright
Cities Revealed
GetMapping PLC 1999
Works
4
72.8m
T RE
ET
'S SGreen, Wellingborough
WP/2014/0029/FM - British Rail Sports4a & Social Club, 38a Broad
OH N
63
±
Scale:
Planning & Local
Development
62a
t
19
1
o2
62
Warehouse
Description
Applicants Property
Application Site
J
ST
16
WP/2014/0029
(accessible from Gold Street/Broad Green), erection of a freestanding office (Class B1) use together with parking provision and
landscaping. Amended Drawings and Additional Information.
Additional Information - Changes to the layout of the development
including the creation of a cycle path to Outlaw Lane; and setting
back the building from the boundaries.
PRE/2013/0108
02.01.2014
New residential scheme (mostly affordable)
TCON/2011/002
6
29.12.2011
Works to lime and pine trees
WU/1972/0152
05.06.1972
Boiler house and air conditional housing
WU/1966/0134
14.09.1966
Extension to dance hall
WU/1965/0179
08.12.1965
Widening of vehicular access and erection of new wall
WU/1959/0111
14.10.1959
Extension to social club
WU/1956/0109
07.11.1956
Extension to club room
WU/1950/0106
17.01.1951
Change of use to club
WU/1949/0067
20.07.1949
Garage
WU/1971/0069
21.04.1971
Additional car parking facilities at rear of club
WU/1971/0084
31.03.1971
Additional WC and store
WU/1969/0066
14.05.1969
Alterations and extension to form cloak room and store
Planning Committee
30 April 2014
28 of 105
WU/1968/0239
30.11.1899
New porch and extension to dance hall
WU/0068/0018
15.08.1968
Sign to name club
WU/1966/0170
09.11.1966
Store and office
WU/1972/0136
05.06.1972
New access from concert room to dressing room
WU/1972/0006
19.01.1972
Storeroom extension
BW/1979/0023
03.07.1980
Illuminated fascia sign
BW/1978/0393
24.05.1978
First floor extension to form committee room
WU/1973/0297
28.11.1973
Alterations to provide access
WU/1973/0241
12.09.1973
Extension to first floor living accommodation to provide two no
additional bedrooms
WU/1973/0168
22.08.1973
Alterations and extensions to form concert room and games room
WP/2001/0127
29.05.2001
Installation of glass recycling banks for public use
Deferred from previous committee for applicant to revisit the layout of the
development and the siting of the buildings.
Revised plans have now been received in response to the Committee's concerns. The
main changes to the scheme are summarised as follows:
The scheme remains as a proposal for 30 no. apartments, but all 1 Bed Flats.
A Cycle Path has been included to the east of the site, leading from the Dun Cow
Development and joining Outlaw Lane on adjacent land.
Planning Committee
30 April 2014
29 of 105
The entire block has been redesigned and the building is now set back from Broad
Green by about 12 metres. The root protection areas of Trees T6, T7, T8 and T10 have
been carefully considered as noted in the Tree Report and these can be retained as
indicated on the site plan.
There are 17 no. parking spaces as previously described in the earlier Transport
Statement, with a parking provision also for disabled persons.
Cycle storage will also be included.
The scheme has been designed to achieve a Code for Sustainable Homes Level 3.
A Refuse and recycling compound is indicated to the eastern area, and an appropriate
turning area has been shown to provide access for weekly storage and collections.
With the proposed cycle path running through the proposed development, this brings it
in line with the objectives of the Wellingborough Town Centre Area Action Plan
(WTCAAP).
Late letters were received as follows Councillor Graham Lawman - commented on the previous proposal prior to design
changes as follows: The design statement and other papers clearly state that there
would be a re-alignment of the wall. I forgot to mention my impression is that the
unattractive facing treatment of these building is at odds with the buildings on the other
side of the road - you will recall that we took great pains to ensure that the masonic
development matched the existing facings, etc. Both façade and roof should be
sympathetic.
In terms of access, it is clear that access should be through the other part of the
development onto Knights Court, which has synergies with this development and direct
access would ensure safer access for the likely residents. This can be done by realigning the housing on the residential development which would give the benefit of
south facing gardens for more access.
Valerie Siddons, 54 Knights Court, Wellingborough "Dear Sir,
I have just been to the site meeting of the above planning application. We could not
hear what was being said and did not have any answers to our questions. I represent
22 flats in the Knights Court Supported living scheme and the 18 flats 101 -135 (all odd
numbers) the properties all face the road will be directly affected if the road comes by
our flats.
One gentleman who I think was the architect made a comment that the care facility was
being separated from the other development as they needed peace and quiet. This
supported living scheme also has people with disabilities who would also like peace and
quiet. We have had years of building works that we have had to put up with. If possible
can our point be brought to the attention of the Planning committee.
I have also sent all copies to Wellingborough Homes asking if they have sold the small
area of land that will enable this planning to go ahead hoping that this is not the case."
Planning Committee
30 April 2014
30 of 105
Owner of no. 38 Broad Green "My name is David Feary and I own No 38 Broad Green directly to the right of the
Railway club site.
Firstly I am delighted that the site is to be developed and I am overall happy with its
proposed use and design although I think that the Dun Cow development is much too
high. The top floor accommodation should have utilised the roof space to give a lower
building, like the superb recently completed Masonic Development opposite. I am so
glad that there is now some Ironstone ! Well I hope its Ironstone Facia ??? included on
this site proposed building.
Me and my neighbours want to advise some concerns and advice to you as follows :
They are in respect of the infrastructure along Broad Green. We really hope that these
are taken seriously in the initial planning and eventual development of the site and
immediate surrounding areas.
ISSUE
1. Flooding on the front road gullies and narrow pathways from the Dun Cow Traffic
Lights right to the Queens Head Public House :
The worst areas are in front of the Railway Club, my Property at No 38 and my
Neighbours at No 39 Broad Green.( I have some photocopies for you all ) There is an
ongoing problem of massive flows of water raking across the busy traffic light areas into
our gullies, because the road has been built up over the years .There are 2 ineffective
drains that do not take water away at a fast enough rate, or are silted and blocked. We
did succeed in getting larger storm gullies fitted in 2009/2010, but these still silt up and
have needed continual maintenance and cleaning to stop this serious problem. As the
proposed use of this of the site is to be for wheelchair and disabled residents its
worrying that several times over the last 2 I 3 years the traffic hitting the waters has
meant that several local wheelchair residents have been completely soaked through
and have had to be taken into our homes and dried off ! The water reaches a depth of
up to 10 inches which when traffic hits& splashes 3 - 4 ft in onto the narrow pavements.
2. Cyclists use our narrow pavements along our side of Broad Green, but ! all our
gateways onto the pavements as per the Railway Club site, are blind ! ! ! and we always
try to remember to sound our horns when exiting .
There have been many, many dangerous incidents over the years and especially
recently, where added new residential developments ( approx 112 apartments in total )
are prompting much higher levels of cyclists and pedestrian traffic along the narrow
pavements.
There are continual collisions, with people exiting their front doors I a baby knocked out
of its pushchair when exiting the local shop, collisions by pavement cyclists hitting at
speed, our cars on exiting our driveways. We have continually contacted and pressured
the local highways departments and finally last year had 3 plastic very basic "No
Cycling" signs put onto 3 of the street lamp posts. But we do get verbal abuse when
challenging cyclists. We understand that on probably the busiest traffic light area in the
town ! that cyclists feel nervous to use the road areas and choose the pathways. We
are really concerned about higher levels of wheelchair based traffic on the paths in
Planning Committee
30 April 2014
31 of 105
respect to pavement Cyclists. There is kind of a more serious accident ! Waiting to
happen we feel !
Proper " Cycle Lanes " along the side of the road areas should be implemented as now
is the ideal time to do this for future safety.
3. Litter along our Frontages :
We do regularly contact the local schools as the children flow past at high levels in the
mornings and at night along our pavements, using the newly sited "Gold St" fish and
chip shop and other shops. Their levels of litter are appalling at some times and we
have to clean the paths ourselves. Also with much higher numbers of residents from the
new developments, the Dun Cow I The 2 large Railway Club sites - this traffic and litter
will be rising. We would request some extra very LARGE litter bins fitting, say 3 or 4
sited along the areas to cope and encourage good disposal , as surely now is the time
to also solve this issue.
Finally, I and some of my close neighbours were very very actively involved with the
council in the completed Masonic apartment development opposite. What a great result
we have, and a real example of the local community getting together."
Previous Committee Report 26th March 2014
Councillor Bell requested a site inspection which was held on Tuesday 25th March
2014.
THE APPLICATION SITE AND SURROUNDINGS:
The application site comprises the British Railway Sports and Social Club. The
premises have been vacant since. The site is occupied by a single storey building, with
open hard-standing curtilage for the remainder of the site, which provides ancillary
parking spaces.
The site lies on the eastern side of Broad Green, adjacent to the triangular and
signalled intersection with Gold Street. The site is within the Wellingborough Town
Centre Action Area Plan and the Wellingborough Town Centre Conservation Area.
The site abuts 3 recently consented schemes. To the north is the Dun Cow Public
House site - which is currently being developed by Wellingborough Homes to provide
26 affordable dwellings (under ref: WP/2012/0315/FM); and at Knights Court which
comprises 2 Wellingborough Homes schemes:
WP/2010/456/FM - Refurbishment/re-cladding of 3 apartment blocks; internal
alterations resulting in a reduction in residential units (from 63 to 51); associated
external works and improvements relating to landscaping, access and car parking
provision; and
WP/2010/0453 - Demolition of existing sheltered housing facility and replacement with a
new 40 unit sheltered housing scheme plus associated car parking and landscaping.
These recent developments in this area, have been to completely refurbish and improve
existing housing in Knights Court, which was carried out by Wellingborough Homes,
transforming former bedsits, built in the 1970s, into modern one and two-bedroom
Planning Committee
30 April 2014
32 of 105
apartments and shared areas for socialising and accessing important support services.
THE PROPOSALS
WP/2014/0029/FM - Demolition of existing building and other structures, construction of
proposed new residential scheme, comprising 30 no. care facility flats (accessible from
Broad Green), erection of a free-standing office (Class B1) use together with parking
provision and landscaping. This development occupies the western part (0.26 hectare)
of the site with frontage to Broad Green.
The mix consists of 27 x 1 beds and 3 x 2 beds with ancillary Close Care Facility with
Manager's Office, WCs and a 13 Person Lift Installation. Facilities include: Fully glazed
entrance lobbies; Resident's Amenity Spaces; Drying Areas and Facilities; 13 Person
Lift to the Care Facility; Cycle & Scooter storage and Recharge facility; Scheme
Manager's Office; Mobility Staircases; Ample Parking; Landscaped gardens and seating
and areas; 24 hour Monitored Emergency Call System; Secured by Design
Certification; and Secure Access via Door Entry System.
The proposals also include a reconstructed crossover on the frontage to Broad Green
and pedestrian-to-vehicle and vehicle-to-vehicle vision will be provided by realignment
of the existing stonewall, by approximately 2.4m either side of the highway access.
A Small 2-Storey Office (Class B1) with a total floor area of 120 square metres, is also
proposed and will be used in connection with the developer's business.
proposed new residential scheme, comprising 48 affordable and retirement apartments
(sheltered accommodation).
Facilities include: Fully glazed entrance lobbies;
Resident's Amenity Spaces; Drying Areas and Facilities; Cycle and Scooter storage and
recharge facility; Mobility Staircases; Central Home Zone Area; Ample Parking;
Landscaped gardens and Home Zone, seating areas. Accommodation mix of 24 x 1
beds; and 24 x 2 beds.
This development is confined to the eastern part (measuring 0.41 hectare) of the site,
adjacent to Knights Court. The proposed development would be accessed off Knights
Court, which joins Gold Street at a simple priority 'T' junction. Gold Street and Knights
Court are bound by footways on both sides of the carriageway, have the benefit of
street lighting and are subject to a 30mph (48kph) speed restriction within the vicinity of
the site. Within the vicinity of the site, Knights Court is a cul-de-sac which serves
approximately 51 dwelling units recently refurbished in 2013.
NATIONAL AND LOCAL PLANNING POLICY:
North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy
Policy 6 (Infrastructure Delivery and Developer Contributions)
Policy 9 (Distribution and Location of Development)
Policy 13 (General Sustainable Development Principles)
Policy 14 (Energy Efficiency and Sustainable Construction)
Policy 15 (Sustainable Housing Provision)
Wellingborough Town Centre Area Action Plan
Policy WTC 9 (Town Centre Mixed Use Areas)
Policy WTC 12 (Heritage)
Planning Committee
30 April 2014
33 of 105
Policy WTC 13 (Housing)
Policy WTC 15 (Public Realm Quality)
Policy WTC 20 (Changes to Town Centre Parking and Servicing)
Policy WTC 21 (Improvements to the Cycle Network)
Policy WTC 22 (Improvements to the Pedestrian Network)
Policy WTC 25 (Town Centre Infrastructure)
Policy PS8 (Vauxhall Dealership, Railway Club, Reachout Centre and Adjoining
Land)
Wellingborough Town Centre Public Realm Strategy SPD (July 2009)
Wellingborough Town Centre Conservation Area Appraisal (July 2009)
Wellingborough Town Centre Public Realm Materials Palette (Feb 2010)
1. NCC Highways - the revised Transport statements in respect of 30 Care Facility Flats
WP/2014/0029 and 48 Affordable and Retirement Apartments WP/2014/0030 have
been reviewed and are found to be fit for purpose. It is not intended to raise an
objection to the proposed development on highway safety or capacity grounds.
2. NCC Archaeology - I did mention to both the architect and the archaeological
contractor that some pre-determination evaluation would be wise in light of the results
at the Dun Cow next door, so if any geotech pits are needed at this stage that would
also be helpful from the archaeological angle. Otherwise I would recommend that we
look at archaeological trenching or trial pits at this stage, as we have a larger area than
at the Dun Cow and good reason to think that the features found there relate to houses
which may be on this site.
3. Wellingborough Town Centre Partnership - no objection.
4. Northamptonshire Police Crime Prevention - Northamptonshire Police has no formal
objection to the planning application in its present form other than to suggest that the
following informatives are included, which if implemented will reduce the likelihood of
crime, disorder and anti-social behaviour occurring.
The applicant has made a commitment within the Design and access statement to
achieve the Secured by Design Award which is welcomed.
- Communal entrance should be linked in to a communal entry system that is capable to
visual and audio to allow residents to vet visitors before allowing access.
- All Entry/Exit and individual flat doors to the houses should meet Pas 23/24 2007 or
equivalent standard, which is the minimum requirement for door security (as per
Secured by Design guides).
- All windows should conform to a minimum performance of BS7950 or PAS 24
- Windows at ground floor should be fitted with 6.4mm laminated glass and have
window restrictors.
- Bin store and mobility scooter storage should be lockable.
- When the lighting scheme has been produced it is important that as well as adopted
areas being considered that un-adopted areas are similarly treated for safety and
security reasons.
- Side and rear boundary (including gates) treatment should be 1.8m in height and
should prevent unauthorized access to the communal amenity space.
Planning Committee
30 April 2014
34 of 105
In addition, Due to the new balconies all doors and (French) windows (with a balcony)
need to be PAS 24 and laminated to P1A. Also all ground floor glazing and those above
a canopy will need to be laminated and meet BS7950 or PAS 24 (unless a fire escape).
5. Environment Agency - we consider that planning permission should only be granted
to the proposed development as submitted if the following planning condition is
imposed as set out below. Without this condition, the proposed development on this
site poses an unacceptable risk to the environment and we may wish to object to the
application.
Condition:
No building works which comprise the erection of a building required to be served by
water services shall be undertaken in connection with any phase of the development
hereby permitted until full details of a scheme including phasing, for the provision of
mains foul sewage infrastructure on and off site has been submitted to and approved in
writing by the Local Planning Authority. No dwelling shall be occupied until the works
have been carried out in accordance with the approved scheme.
Reason:
To prevent flooding, pollution and detriment to public amenity through provision of
suitable water infrastructure.
In order to satisfy the above condition, an adequate scheme would need to be
submitted demonstrating that there is (or will be prior to occupation) sufficient
infrastructure capacity existing for the connection, conveyance, treatment and disposal
of quantity and quality of water within the proposed phasing of development.
6. Anglian Water - no drainage works shall commence until a surface water
management strategy has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local
Planning Authority. No hard-standing areas to be constructed until the works have
been carried out in accordance with the surface water strategy so approved unless
otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason - To prevent
environmental and amenity problems arising from flooding.
7. Natural England - no objection.
8. BCW Environmental Protection - Soiltechnics report STL2671A regarding the above
sites at Broad Green is acceptable. The report identifies potential contaminants PCBs
and ground gas, which requires further investigation in a phase 2 assessment. I look
forward to receiving further reports regarding the site.
9. BCW Housing Strategy - Overall: The supply of housing has significantly reduced
over the last three years. In 2007/08 there were 474 homes completed and falling to
122 in 2011/12, however market conditions in 2013-2014 are improving and successful
affordable housing completions have taken place such as 26 units at Da Vinci Court
(former Prince of Wales PH) and 31 units at Senwick Road/Corrie Close. By end of
March 2014 there will be a further 10 affordable homes at Great Doddington, 23 at the
Old Sunlight Factory, Buckwell End and 11 units at Palmer Court, Wellingborough
completed. There are currently 108 affordable housing units on sites at Spur
Road/Doddington Road Wellingborough, Dun Cow site Wellingborough, Meadowlands
Great Harrowden and the Cranwell at Doddington Road, Wellingborough which will be
Planning Committee
30 April 2014
35 of 105
completed throughout 2014.
The impact of this medium term reduction in new homes supply has lead to an increase
in costs to the Council for statutory homeless provisions. The lack of one bed provision
and availability of ground floor, wheelchair with housing support has restricted the
Council's ability to find accommodation for people who the Council has a statutory duty
towards e.g. single people with mental health, drug and alcohol (dual diagnosis) and
physical disability.
There is also a lack of two bedroom properties which is compounded further by the
under-occupancy changes implemented through the Welfare Reform Act. This lack of
supply of two beds could further increase the costs to the Council for statutory
homeless as housing associations pursue evictions. Most families who seek help from
the Council are given financial assistance to access the private rented sector; again
there is a lack of two bed stock in the private rented sector.
The housing register refresh this year to ensure only those in housing need are
registered shows at week ending October 2013 of the 482 people registered, 27% are
working, 35% are unemployed and 16% who are retired. Analysis undertaken shows
those working would qualify for shared ownership products and market homes if there
was a supply of one and two bed properties and they could access mortgage products.
Changes to commissioning services, budget allocation from Health to Social Care and
2nd tier local Authority grant to Social Care for statutory functions ie. disabled facilities
grants/aids and adaptations, have the potential to increase the number of older or
disabled people in accommodation which is not suitable to meet their needs if
adaptations cannot be provided. There are 8763 pensioner households in the Borough
at as 2011 which is expected to rise by 22.7% by 2021 to 10,752 and 2,226 people
aged 18-64 with a moderate or serious personal care disability in 2012 is predicted to
increase to 2335 by 2020 (www.pansi.org.uk vers7 produced 23/04/13).
Overall Housing Mix (not just affordable)
The Strategic Housing Market Assessment (SHMA) 2012 (table 5.12b page 147)
updated using the Housing Vision Needs Assessment Toolkit 2013 identifies that the
following breakdown of units is required to meeting projected housing requirements
2011-2031:
Predominantly 1 bed (apx 90%)
Some 2 bed (9%)
No three bed
Some 4 bed (1%)
This clearly demonstrates across the Borough there is a higher need for smaller units,
and this is particularly reflected in the affordable housing need. This is likely to be
reinforced with the advent of Welfare Reforms and the under occupancy changes with a
likely increase in demand in the private rented and social housing sectors, for affordable
accommodation in smaller units, including bedsits and single rooms in shared houses.
There are also a growing number of older single people or couples living in family social
rented homes who would benefit from a development of this type freeing up scarce
social rented family homes.
Tenure of property - Affordable Units
Planning Committee
30 April 2014
36 of 105
The SHMA (2012) identifies that the following breakdown should be applied to meet
affordable housing needs:
- 77% social rented
- 18% affordable rented
- 5% shared ownership
Therefore in terms of affordable housing delivery the split between rented and
intermediate should comprise a split based on the above.
This development in conjunction with WP/2014/0030a/FM will contribute to meeting this
need.
Given the nature of the development, the housing needs which exist in the Borough and
the support services required for vulnerable people it is recommended that communal
space be provided which would enable the residents within the scheme to have a
meeting place and access to communal facilities for lunches or meals and
bathing/shower facilities; such a space could be made available to non residents given
the demographics for the elderly population and those with personal care needs.
Conclusion
The proposals are considered acceptable and have the support of the housing service.
A S106 agreement should be drawn up ensuring in perpetuity that the units are
affordable houses and that some communal facilities should be provided in each
development for the benefit of the occupants.
10. BCW Design and Conservation Officer - having had the opportunity of considering
this scheme at an early stage and as a result of successful design negotiations, I
confirm that the form and appearance of both developments (fronting Broad Green and
at the rear accessed off Knights Court) are now acceptable in design and conservation
terms. In my opinion, they meet the statutory test of preserving the character and
appearance of the adjacent conservation area and listed buildings.
11. Wellingborough NORSE - the proposed Care Home is to be classed as a domestic
premise, I would request a financial contribution towards the provision of waste
receptacles. If the proposed development is classed as a commercial premise, the
facility would be required to make their own arrangements for waste collection.
Wellingborough Norse would be able to provide a quote if required.
12. Dave Feary - well I really like the changes to some stone on the facades and thanks
so much for sending me details. I am very happy with everything and hope the the
stone facia materials will be the same in colour and style to the ironstone Masonic
development opposite us :) if at all possible. All the neighbours are really hoping that
the final approvals from the council (if they have listened ?) include some solutions to
the very worrying and ongoing drainage of surface water issues along our gullies and
the pavement cyclists !! As this had been advised carefully and thoroughly by us all,
because of the type of disabled tenanted housing that is going up.
13. Richard and Valerie Siddons of no. 54 Knights Court - no objection to the proposals
in principle, but concerns expressed regarding disruption and disturbance during
construction works, parking problems, problems of access for emergency vehicles
Planning Committee
30 April 2014
37 of 105
14. Andrew Law - I also object to the amendments of the historic boundary stone wall
which runs along Broad Green. I fear that the current planned access point to this site
will cause further peak daytime congestion for an already busy area and possibly cause
further collisions. The plot extends further south and it is possible to provide access
from Knights Court on into the northern half thus alleviating any problems. Pavement
width along Broad Green is also very limited, adding further pedestrian traffic could
force some to step into the road. I would prefer see the salvaged local sandstone from
Springhill House incorporated into the forward elevations so thus retaining local
character and improving the conservation area.
15. Geoff Taylor of no. 3 Harrowden Gardens - I have no objection to the proposed
uses for the site. However the Town Centre Action Area Plan proposes (Policy WTC
21) that a footpath/cycleway should be provided from Gold Street to St Johns Street,
and beyond. The route should be (WTC21 ii) well lit at night.
I understand a part of this route is being provided in developing the adjoining site
(former Dun Cow PH). The proposals for developing the Railway Club site do not
provide for the continuation of this route to Outlaw Lane. The rearward site (0030)
shows an access onto Outlaw Lane. However, it does not appear that even
pedestrians could pass directly through the development from Knights Court, let alone
cyclists.
Neither the Design and Access Statement nor the Transport Assessment acknowledge
this proposal, or seek to explain how its purpose is otherwise going to be achieved.
The Transport Assessment gives the impression that existing footpath and highway
provision adequately meet the needs of pedestrians and cyclists. However there is
clearly a problem with cyclists using the footway just south of the site, where it is
extremely narrow. Cycling up High St is an unpleasant experience because of the steep
gradient, poor road surface (recent part resurfacing greatly appreciated) and relatively
high vehicle speeds, especially in the vicinity of the fast angled left turn north of
Jacksons Lane. When a pedestrian, I find crossing the St Johns St junction with High St
extremely awkward because the road layout allows southbound traffic from Broad
Green to turn left into St Johns St at considerable speed, many or most without using
the left indicator.
I am asking that both 0029 and 0030 should be rejected in favour of proposals which
provide a footpath/cycleway route consistent with WTC 21, and well lit. In respect of
both the present scheme and any alternative, bearing in mind the high stone wall on the
north side of Outlaw Lane, any scheme should provide adequate visibility at the junction
with Outlaw Lane.
ASSESSMENT:
The Planning Policy Context
At the heart of the NPPF is a presumption in favour of sustainable development. For
decision-taking this means approving development proposals that accord with the
development plan. The NPPF encourages the reuse of brownfield sites such as this to
provide new housing. The application site is a brownfield site by definition and as it is
located in the Town Centre, which is accessible, then the proposed development
passes the sustainability test and is consistent with the NPPF.
Planning Committee
30 April 2014
38 of 105
The NPPF echoes the statutory provision under Section 38(6) of the Planning &
Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 replaces section 54(A) of the Town & Country Planning
Act 1990 and states that if regard is to be had to the development plan for the purpose
of any determination under the Planning Act, the determination must be made in
accordance with the plan, unless material considerations indicate otherwise.
The application site is within the Town Centre Conservation Area and within one of the
identified Town Centre Mixed Use Areas. Its also forms part of Site A on the Proposals
Map for the Town Centre, which is designated for predominantly residential
development. Under Policy PS8, there is a requirement for the proposal on the Railway
Club site to provide attractive frontage to Broad Green. The site is at an identified
gateway to the town centre. Any scheme coming forward in this important location
must therefore be of the highest quality and respect the historic character of the area.
The design in respect of the care facility has been substantially changes and together
with the sheltered proposal at the rear, it is considered that the proposals meet the
requirements of the relevant Town Centre policies.
Policy 13(f) of the NNCSS and the NPPF generally seek to retain community facilities
such as recreational/leisure facilities. As this facility has been vacant for some time and
there are alternative facilities within the town, its loss would not be problematic. In any
case, the prevailing development plan provision, which designates the site for housing
development should take precedent.
Character and Appearance and the Effect on the Conservation Area
Policy WTC 12 and guidance within the Conservation Area Appraisal both seek the
retention of buildings of townscape merit as they make an important contribution to the
character of the area. The existing buildings and other structures on the site have no
architectural merit and their replacement with a development that enhances the
appearance of the area ought to be embraced.
Policy PS 8 seeks that the development of Sites A and B should be co-ordinated to
provide for predominantly residential mixed use development to include new high
quality north south pedestrian and cycle route lined by active building frontages.
Redevelopment must be undertaken to a high design quality and a perimeter block
urban design arrangement has been provided with active frontages defining the public
realm.
An assessment of the proposal and in particular its impact on the Conservation Area
has to be made in relation to the surrounding development. The development at the
Dun Cow Public House site is under construction and the extension to the Masonic
Lodge on the opposite side of the road provide suitable reference points for the
development of this site.
The design of the façade to Broad Green has been substantially improved. It now
consists of a combination of projecting gables in stone facing panels, concrete roof tiles,
coloured rendered panels. Additional articulation and interest are provided in the form
of Juliet balconies comprising railings and glass panels. The amended elevation now
relates satisfactorily to the adjoining Dun Cow development, and together with the
Masonic Lodge development across the road, the street scene is more interesting and
balanced. The roof profiles for all the developments are similar, as are their
fenestration.
Planning Committee
30 April 2014
39 of 105
Section 72(1) of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990,
refers to the duty of the decision maker to pay special attention to the desirability of
preserving or enhancing the character or appearance of conservation areas. The
proposed development clearly passes this statutory test. The replacement of the
existing buildings and structures with the proposed buildings would enhance the
appearance of the Town Centre Conservation Area.
Access Arrangement, Parking Provision and Highway Safety
It should be noted that the original intention of the applicant was to submit the 2
applications as a single proposal. As a result of the response of the County Council
Highways Engineer concerning thresholds, it was decided to split the application into 2
separate proposals to minimise highway impact. From the responses to consultations,
there are suggestions that the access to the entire development should be confined to
the rear of the site via Knights Court. The applicant has discussed this with
Wellingborough Homes who own Knights Court and it has been agreed that the split
access arrangements offers the best solution.
In relation to the proposed care facility, it should be noted that access is taken from the
existing cross-over on Broad Green frontage. The care facility, in addition to the
proposed free-standing office building would provide a total of 17 car parking spaces.
The application is accompanied by a Transport Assessment that provides indication
that the proposed development is predicted to generate approximately 6 separate
vehicle movements associated with the residents living in the care facility during the
morning peak. It is assumed that a maximum of approximately 3 visitors will drive to
the facility during a morning peak period and of these, 2 out of 3 will remain on site for
more than 1 hour. This will result in 4 separate vehicle movements associated with
visitors to the facility.
It should be noted that the future residents are likely to have a very low car ownership
ratio. In addition, with the Close Care residents living within walking distance of the
Wellingborough town centre, it is highly likely that their main mode of transport will be
via alternative means to the private car. Hence, vehicle generation will remain low.
The proposed site is predicted to provide a single 2 storey office block which will serve.
The office will have a total floor area of approximately 140m2. It is assumed that
approximately 6 staff will occupy the premises and of these, 4 will drive to work. Hence
the proposed office element of the redevelopment is predicted to generate 4 separate
vehicle movements.
The proposed redevelopment as a whole is predicted to produce a maximum of 14
separate vehicle movements during the morning peak period (0800 - 0900). The
proposed development will produce less than 30 two-way vehicle movements within
any given peak hour, using conservative values. The Department for Transport's
Guidance on Transport Assessment (GTA) states that a development which produces
30 two-way vehicle movements during any given peak hour is unlikely to have a
detrimental impact on the surrounding highway network. As a result, it is concluded
that the predicted number of vehicular trips expected to be generated as a result of the
proposed development will have no significant adverse impact on the adjacent highway
network.
Planning Committee
30 April 2014
40 of 105
In the light of the foregoing, the care home would not be expected to generate a
significant amount of traffic and having regard to the existing use as a
recreational/leisure facility, the proposed development would generate a significantly
less amount of traffic when compared to the use of the existing facility at its peak.
The car parking spaces for the redevelopment will be provided in accordance to
standards set out in Northamptonshire County Council's Supplementary Planning
Guidance (SPG) dated March 2003. The provision therein requires 1 space per 10
bedrooms of a care/nursing home. The proposed redevelopment will provide a total of
17 car parking spaces. This equates to the maximum allowance under the NCC SPG
and therefore complies with the County Council standard.
Amenity Impact
Sufficient distance exists between the proposed building and the adjoining building to
the south at no. 38 Broad Green. Consideration has also been given to the siting and
footprint of the adjoining development under construction at the Dun Cow PH.
Furthermore, the mature trees at the northern boundary of the site are proposed to be
retained - which would safeguard the living conditions of the occupiers of the respective
developments.
Overall the proposed development will return a derelict site to a beneficial use which is
compatible with the surrounding area which can only have a positive impact upon
neighbour's amenities.
Conclusion
The proposal maximises the potential of the site without detracting from the existing
character and the setting of the Town Centre Conservation Area and is designed to
reflect the pattern of the surrounding development. Off street car parking spaces are
provided and the scheme is designed to be safe and accessible to local facilities. The
development is carefully laid out to minimise harm to existing and future neighbours and
complies with the relevant development plan policies.
RECOMMENDATION:
Grant planning permission subject to the following conditions:
Conditions/Reasons:
1. The development shall be begun no later than 3 years beginning with the date of this
permission.
Purchase Act 2004.
3. Notwithstanding any materials specified in the application form and/or the drawings,
particulars and samples of the materials to be used on all external surfaces of the
buildings, including fenestration, windows, doors, eaves and verges shall be
submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority before the
commencement of the development. The development shall be carried out in
accordance with the approved details.
Planning Committee
30 April 2014
41 of 105
4. Reason: To ensure a satisfactory appearance for the development in the interest of
visual amenity.
5. Details of those parts of the site not covered by buildings including any parking,
roads, footpath, hard and soft landscaping, surface and boundary treatments shall be
6. Reason: To ensure that the site is satisfactorily landscaped and in order to maintain
and enhance the visual amenity of the area.
7. The proposed tree planting/landscape scheme shall be implemented during the next
planting season after the completion of the building operations on site or within any
such longer period as may be agreed in writing with the local planning authority.
Such planting shall be maintained, including the replacement of dead, dying or
defective trees, shrubs or ground cover plants for a period of 5 years.
9. No development shall commence until measures for the protection of the retained
trees in accordance with BS5837 have been implemented. These measures shall
remain in place until the completion of the development. No vehicles, plant or
materials shall be driven or placed within the areas providing tree protection.
10. Reason: To protect the trees which are to be retained on the site in the interests of
the visual amenities of the area.
11. No development shall take place within the area indicated until the applicant, or
their agents or successors in title, has secured the implementation of a programme
of archaeological work in accordance with a written scheme of investigation which
has been submitted by the applicant and approved in writing by the local planning
authority.
and recorded, in accordance with National Planning Policy Framework paragraph
141.
remediated in accordance with the agreed scheme prior to first occupation.
14. Reason: To protect future occupiers from the potential effect of contamination.
15. No building works which comprise the erection of a building required to be served
by water services shall be undertaken in connection with any phase of the
development hereby permitted until full details of a scheme including phasing, for the
provision of mains foul sewage infrastructure on and off site has been submitted to
Planning Committee
30 April 2014
42 of 105
and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The building shall not be
occupied until the works have been carried out in accordance with the approved
scheme.
In
order to satisfy the above condition, an adequate scheme would need to be
infrastructure capacity existing for the connection, conveyance, treatment and
disposal of quantity and quality of water within the proposed phasing of development.
16. Reason: To prevent flooding, pollution and detriment to public amenity through
provision of suitable water infrastructure.
17. The car parking spaces shown on the approved drawings shall be laid out and
provided before the occupation of the building and shall thereafter be kept free from
obstruction and shall be retained for parking purposes for the occupiers of the
development and their visitors.
18. Reason: To ensure adequate off-street parking provision and in order to prevent
additional parking in surrounding streets which, could be detrimental to amenity and
prejudicial to safety.
INFORMATIVE/S:
1. Pursuant to Section 38(6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004, the
Policy PS 8 (Vauxhall Dealership, Railway Club, Reachout Centre and Adjoining
Land)
Planning Committee
30 April 2014
43 of 105
3. The applicant is advised that this decision relates to the following drawing numbers
received on the date shown:
Drawing Numbers:
Date Received:
Site Location, 2097-02, 03B, 04 & 05
03/03/2014
4. Prior to occupation of the newly created premises(s), the street numbering for this
development shall be agreed with the Street Naming and Numbering Officer. When
property.
Application forms for Street Naming and Numbering are available at
5. The applicant/developer's attention is drawn to the following advice from the Police
Crime Prevention Unit:
- Communal entrance should be linked in to a communal entry system that is capable
to visual and audio to allow residents to vet visitors before allowing access.
- All Entry/Exit and individual flat doors to the houses should meet PAS 23/24 2007
or equivalent standard, which is the minimum requirement for door security (as per
window restrictors.
- When the lighting scheme has been produced it is important that as well as
adopted areas being considered that un-adopted areas are similarly treated for
safety and security reasons.
Planning Committee
30 April 2014
44 of 105
Planning Committee
30 April 2014
Case Officer Mr Ola Duyile
Date received
Date valid
27 January 2014 4 February 2014
WP/2014/0030
Overall Expiry Ward
5 May 2014
Swanspool
Parish
Wellingborough
Applicant Mr John Harmon
Agent
Mr Eric Ellis
Location 38a British Rail Sports and Social Club Broad Green Wellingborough
Northamptonshire NN8 4LH
Proposal Demolition of existing building and other structures, construction of
PLANNING HISTORY:
WP/2014/0020
23.01.2014
proposed new residential scheme in two blocks, comprising 30no.
care facility flats and 48no. affordable and retirement (accessible from
Gold Street/Broad Green) 1 and 2 bedroom apartments (accessible
from Knights Court); erection of a free-standing office (Class B1 use)
together with parking provision and landscaping
WP/2014/0030
WP/2014/0029
Planning Committee
30 April 2014
45 of 105
21
a
23
PH
82.0m
9a
24
9
5
4
81.7m
T
57
13
11
O
EE
32
4a
36
G
LD
R
62
33
CR
Ward Bd y
a
11
ST
34
21
40
5
32
AD
ARRO WDEN RO
WP/2014/0030/FM
1t
o3
50
45
NO
H
RT
2
1
80.8m
RE
ST
11
5
13
91
o
5t
12
82
33
ESS
CO
9
10
to
T
33a
UR
27
3
1t
11
TS
23
o1
I GH
A
KN
33b
)
1
10
79.6m
3
1a
36
35
34
41 5
3
to
39
Hom-i-lea
74
to
78
37
to
38
a
73
to
77
38
to 41
42to
51
Hatton House
77
to
87
62
to
72
44
to
48 53
to
63
43
to
47
61
to
71
37
50
to
60
65
to
75
38
36
Club
39
Palmer
Court
23
49
to
59
1 to 25
A
Hatton
Gardens
38
ET
2 to
2
PH
39a
74.1m
42
8
T
OU
Posts
N
LA
LAW
E
45
4
CR
ED
an
d
W
ar
d
Bd
y
10
N
OU T
E
LAN
LAW
2
1
51
Posts
PH
15
TCB
14
EN
Broad Green
49
GR E
EE
AD
O
GR
48
BRO
BR
AD
53
W
HA
ON
RT
OS
CL
E
80.2m
BR
DG
RE
76.5m
EN
56
OA
Garage
Garage
War Meml
18
15
16
17
14
Posts
Posts
10 to
Garage
12
t
57
24
26
1
o6
22
11
9
Legend
© Crown Copyright
Cities Revealed
GetMapping PLC 1999
Works
4
72.8m
4a
ST R
EET
N'S Green, Wellingborough
WP/2014/0030/FM - British Rail Sports & Social Club, 38a Broad
J OH
63
±
Scale:
1:1,250
Planning & Local
Development
62a
t
19
1
o2
62
Warehouse
Description
Applicants Property
Application Site
ST
16
(accessible from Gold Street/Broad Green), erection of a freestanding office (Class B1) use together with parking provision and
landscaping. Amended Drawings and Additional Information.
Additional Information - Changes to the layout of the development
including the creation of a cycle path to Outlaw Lane; and setting
back the building from the boundaries.
PRE/2013/0108
02.01.2014
New residential scheme (mostly affordable)
TCON/2011/0026
29.12.2011
Works to lime and pine trees
WU/1972/0152
05.06.1972
Boiler house and air conditional housing
WU/1966/0134
14.09.1966
Extension to dance hall
WU/1965/0179
08.12.1965
Widening of vehicular access and erection of new wall
WU/1959/0111
14.10.1959
Extension to social club
WU/1956/0109
07.11.1956
Extension to club room
WU/1950/0106
17.01.1951
Change of use to club
WU/1949/0067
20.07.1949
Garage
WU/1971/0069
21.04.1971
Additional car parking facilities at rear of club
WU/1971/0084
31.03.1971
Additional WC and store
WU/1969/0066
14.05.1969
Alterations and extension to form cloak room and store
WU/1968/0239
New porch and extension to dance hall
Planning Committee
30 April 2014
46 of 105
WU/0068/0018
15.08.1968
Sign to name club
WU/1966/0170
09.11.1966
Store and office
WU/1972/0136
05.06.1972
New access from concert room to dressing room
WU/1972/0006
19.01.1972
Storeroom extension
BW/1979/0023
03.07.1980
Illuminated fascia sign
BW/1978/0393
24.05.1978
First floor extension to form committee room
WU/1973/0297
28.11.1973
Alterations to provide access
WU/1973/0241
12.09.1973
Extension to first floor living accommodation to provide two no
additional bedrooms
WU/1973/0168
22.08.1973
Alterations and extensions to form concert room and games room
WP/2001/0127
29.05.2001
Installation of glass recycling banks for public use
Deferred from previous committee for applicant to revisit the layout of the
development and the siting of the buildings.
Revised plans have now been received in response to the Committee's concerns. The
main changes to the scheme are summarised as follows:
The scheme remains as a proposal for 48 no. 1 & 2 Bed Flats.
A Cycle Path has been included to the west of the site, leading from the Dun Cow
Development and joining Outlaw Lane to the south.
The flats previously positioned at the south west corner, have been re-located to the
east of the site, designated as Block C.
The gable of this new block has no overlooking windows and is set out at minimum
Planning Committee
30 April 2014
47 of 105
distance of 50'0'' from the existing dwellings in Knight's Court. The existing screen of
Maple and Elder trees and shrubs has been retained, which forms a natural barrier
between the developments.
The scheme is now in three Blocks - A, B & C and provides 37 no. parking spaces as
described in the earlier Transport Statement, with a parking provision also for disabled
persons. Cycle storage will also be included.
The scheme has been designed to achieve a Code for Sustainable Homes Level 3.
A Refuse and recycling area is indicated to the southern area, and an appropriate
access and turning area will be provided for weekly storage collections.
A pedestrian link is included from the scheme, via the cycle path and Outlaw Lane to
the south.
With the proposed cycle path running through the proposed development, this brings it
in line with the objectives of the Wellingborough Town Centre Area Action Plan
(WTCAAP).
Late letters received as follows Councillor Graham Lawman - commented on the previous proposal prior to design
changes as follows: The design statement and other papers clearly state that there
would be a re-alignment of the wall. I forgot to mention my impression is that the
unattractive facing treatment of these building is at odds with the buildings on the other
side of the road - you will recall that we took great pains to ensure that the masonic
development matched the existing facings, etc. Both façade and roof should be
sympathetic.
In terms of access, it is clear that access should be through the other part of the
development onto Knights Court, which has synergies with this development and direct
access would ensure safer access for the likely residents. This can be done by realigning the housing on the residential development which would give the benefit of
south facing gardens for more access.
Valerie Siddons, 54 Knights Court, Wellingborough "Dear Sir,
I have just been to the site meeting of the above planning application. We could not
hear what was being said and did not have any answers to our questions. I represent
22 flats in the Knights Court Supported living scheme and the 18 flats 101 -135 (all odd
numbers) the properties all face the road will be directly affected if the road comes by
our flats.
One gentleman who I think was the architect made a comment that the care facility was
being separated from the other development as they needed peace and quiet. This
supported living scheme also has people with disabilities who would also like peace and
quiet. We have had years of building works that we have had to put up with. If possible
can our point be brought to the attention of the Planning committee.
I have also sent all copies to Wellingborough Homes asking if they have sold the small
area of land that will enable this planning to go ahead hoping that this is not the case."
Planning Committee
30 April 2014
48 of 105
Owner of no. 38 Broad Green "My name is David Feary and I own No 38 Broad Green directly to the right of the
Railway club site.
Firstly I am delighted that the site is to be developed and I am overall happy with its
proposed use and design although I think that the Dun Cow development is much too
high. The top floor accommodation should have utilised the roof space to give a lower
building, like the superb recently completed Masonic Development opposite. I am so
glad that there is now some Ironstone ! Well I hope its Ironstone Facia ??? included on
this site proposed building.
Me and my neighbours want to advise some concerns and advice to you as follows :
They are in respect of the infrastructure along Broad Green. We really hope that these
are taken seriously in the initial planning and eventual development of the site and
immediate surrounding areas.
ISSUE
1. Flooding on the front road gullies and narrow pathways from the Dun Cow Traffic
Lights right to the Queens Head Public House :
The worst areas are in front of the Railway Club, my Property at No 38 and my
Neighbours at No 39 Broad Green.( I have some photocopies for you all ) There is an
ongoing problem of massive flows of water raking across the busy traffic light areas into
our gullies, because the road has been built up over the years .There are 2 ineffective
drains that do not take water away at a fast enough rate, or are silted and blocked. We
did succeed in getting larger storm gullies fitted in 2009/2010, but these still silt up and
have needed continual maintenance and cleaning to stop this serious problem. As the
proposed use of this of the site is to be for wheelchair and disabled residents its
worrying that several times over the last 2 I 3 years the traffic hitting the waters has
meant that several local wheelchair residents have been completely soaked through
and have had to be taken into our homes and dried off ! The water reaches a depth of
up to 10 inches which when traffic hits& splashes 3 - 4 ft in onto the narrow pavements.
2. Cyclists use our narrow pavements along our side of Broad Green, but ! all our
gateways onto the pavements as per the Railway Club site, are blind ! ! ! and we always
try to remember to sound our horns when exiting .
There have been many, many dangerous incidents over the years and especially
recently, where added new residential developments ( approx 112 apartments in total )
are prompting much higher levels of cyclists and pedestrian traffic along the narrow
pavements.
There are continual collisions, with people exiting their front doors I a baby knocked out
of its pushchair when exiting the local shop, collisions by pavement cyclists hitting at
speed, our cars on exiting our driveways. We have continually contacted and pressured
the local highways departments and finally last year had 3 plastic very basic "No
Cycling" signs put onto 3 of the street lamp posts. But we do get verbal abuse when
challenging cyclists. We understand that on probably the busiest traffic light area in the
town ! that cyclists feel nervous to use the road areas and choose the pathways. We
Planning Committee
30 April 2014
49 of 105
are really concerned about higher levels of wheelchair based traffic on the paths in
respect to pavement Cyclists. There is kind of a more serious accident ! Waiting to
happen we feel !
Proper " Cycle Lanes " along the side of the road areas should be implemented as now
is the ideal time to do this for future safety.
3. Litter along our Frontages :
We do regularly contact the local schools as the children flow past at high levels in the
mornings and at night along our pavements, using the newly sited "Gold St" fish and
chip shop and other shops. Their levels of litter are appalling at some times and we
have to clean the paths ourselves. Also with much higher numbers of residents from the
new developments, the Dun Cow I The 2 large Railway Club sites - this traffic and litter
will be rising. We would request some extra very LARGE litter bins fitting, say 3 or 4
sited along the areas to cope and encourage good disposal , as surely now is the time
to also solve this issue.
Finally, I and some of my close neighbours were very very actively involved with the
council in the completed Masonic apartment development opposite. What a great result
we have, and a real example of the local community getting together."
Previous Committee 26th March 2014
Councillor Bell requested a site inspection which was held on Tuesday 25th March
2014.
THE APPLICATION SITE AND SURROUNDINGS:
The application site comprises the British Railway Sports and Social Club. The
premises have been vacant since. The site is occupied by a single storey building, with
open hard-standing curtilage for the remainder of the site, which provides ancillary
parking spaces.
The site lies on the eastern side of Broad Green, adjacent to the triangular and
signalled intersection with Gold Street. The site is within the Wellingborough Town
Centre Action Area Plan and the Wellingborough Town Centre Conservation Area.
The site abuts 3 recently consented schemes. To the north is the Dun Cow Public
House site - which is currently being developed by Wellingborough Homes to provide
26 affordable dwellings (under ref: WP/2012/0315/FM); and at Knights Court which
comprises 2 Wellingborough Homes schemes:
WP/2010/456/FM - Refurbishment/re-cladding of 3 apartment blocks; internal
alterations resulting in a reduction in residential units (from 63 to 51); associated
external works and improvements relating to landscaping, access and car parking
provision; and
WP/2010/0453 - Demolition of existing sheltered housing facility and replacement with a
new 40 unit sheltered housing scheme plus associated car parking and landscaping.
These recent developments in this area, have been to completely refurbish and improve
existing housing in Knights Court, which was carried out by Wellingborough Homes,
Planning Committee
30 April 2014
50 of 105
transforming former bedsits, built in the 1970s, into modern one and two-bedroom
apartments and shared areas for socialising and accessing important support services.
THE PROPOSALS
proposed new residential scheme, comprising 30 no. care facility flats (accessible from
Broad Green), erection of a free-standing office (Class B1) use together with parking
provision and landscaping. This development occupies the western part (0.26 hectare)
of the site with frontage to Broad Green.
The mix consists of 27 x 1 beds and 3 x 2 beds with ancillary Close Care Facility with
Manager's Office, WCs and a 13 Person Lift Installation. Facilities include: Fully glazed
entrance lobbies; Resident's Amenity Spaces; Drying Areas and Facilities; 13 Person
Lift to the Care Facility; Cycle and Scooter storage and Recharge facility; Scheme
Manager's Office; Mobility Staircases; Ample Parking; Landscaped gardens and seating
and areas; 24 hour Monitored Emergency Call System; Secured by Design
Certification; and Secure Access via Door Entry System.
The proposals also include a reconstructed crossover on the frontage to Broad Green
and pedestrian-to-vehicle and vehicle-to-vehicle vision will be provided by realignment
of the existing stonewall, by approximately 2.4m either side of the highway access.
A Small 2-Storey Office (Class B1) with a total floor area of 120 square metres, is also
proposed and will be used in connection with the developer's business.
proposed new residential scheme, comprising 48 affordable and retirement apartments
(sheltered accommodation).
Facilities include: Fully glazed entrance lobbies;
Resident's Amenity Spaces; Drying Areas and Facilities; Cycle and Scooter storage and
recharge facility; Mobility Staircases; Central Home Zone Area; Ample Parking;
Landscaped gardens and Home Zone, seating areas. Accommodation mix of 24 x 1
beds; and 24 x 2 beds.
This development is confined to the eastern part (measuring 0.41 hectare) of the site,
adjacent to Knights Court. The proposed development would be accessed off Knights
Court, which joins Gold Street at a simple priority 'T' junction. Gold Street and Knights
Court are bound by footways on both sides of the carriageway, have the benefit of
street lighting and are subject to a 30mph (48kph) speed restriction within the vicinity of
the site. Within the vicinity of the site, Knights Court is a cul-de-sac which serves
approximately 51 dwelling units recently refurbished in 2013.
Planning Committee
30 April 2014
51 of 105
Land)
Wellingborough Town Centre Public Realm Strategy SPD (July 2009)
Wellingborough Town Centre Conservation Area Appraisal (July 2009)
Wellingborough Town Centre Public Realm Materials Palette (Feb 2010)
1. NCC Highways - the revised Transport statements in respect of 30 Care Facility Flats
WP/2014/0029 and 48 Affordable and Retirement Apartments WP/2014/0030 have
been reviewed and are found to be fit for purpose. It is not intended to raise an
objection to the proposed development on highway safety or capacity grounds.
2. NCC Archaeology - I did mention to both the architect and the archaeological
contractor that some pre-determination evaluation would be wise in light of the results
at the Dun Cow next door, so if any geotech pits are needed at this stage that would
also be helpful from the archaeological angle. Otherwise I would recommend that we
look at archaeological trenching or trial pits at this stage, as we have a larger area than
at the Dun Cow and good reason to think that the features found there relate to houses
which may be on this site.
3. Northamptonshire Police Crime Prevention - Northamptonshire Police has no formal
objection to the planning application in its present form other than to suggest that the
following informatives are included, which if implemented will reduce the likelihood of
crime, disorder and anti-social behaviour occurring.
The applicant has made a commitment within the Design and access statement to
achieve the Secured by Design Award which is welcomed.
- Communal entrance should be linked in to a communal entry system that is capable to
visual and audio to allow residents to vet visitors before allowing access.
- All Entry/Exit and individual flat doors to the houses should meet PAS 23/24 2007 or
equivalent standard, which is the minimum requirement for door security (as per
window restrictors.
security reasons.
4. Environment Agency - we consider that planning permission should only be granted
to the proposed development as submitted if the following planning condition is
Planning Committee
30 April 2014
52 of 105
imposed as set out below. Without this condition, the proposed development on this
site poses an unacceptable risk to the environment and we may wish to object to the
application.
Condition:
No building works which comprise the erection of a building required to be served by
water services shall be undertaken in connection with any phase of the development
hereby permitted until full details of a scheme including phasing, for the provision of
mains foul sewage infrastructure on and off site has been submitted to and approved in
writing by the Local Planning Authority. No dwelling shall be occupied until the works
have been carried out in accordance with the approved scheme
Reason:
To prevent flooding, pollution and detriment to public amenity through provision of
suitable water infrastructure.
infrastructure capacity existing for the connection, conveyance, treatment and disposal
of quantity and quality of water within the proposed phasing of development.
5. Anglian Water - no drainage works shall commence until a surface water
management strategy has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local
Planning Authority. No hard-standing areas to be constructed until the works have
been carried out in accordance with the surface water strategy so approved unless
otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason - To prevent
environmental and amenity problems arising from flooding.
6. Natural England - no objection.
7. BCW Environmental Protection - Soiltechnics report STL2671A regarding the above
sites at Broad Green is acceptable. The report identifies potential contaminants PCBs
and ground gas, which requires further investigation in a phase 2 assessment. I look
forward to receiving further reports regarding the site.
8. BCW Housing Strategy Overall:
The supply of housing has significantly reduced over the last three years. In 2007/08
there were 474 homes completed and falling to 122 in 2011/12, however market
conditions in 2013-2014 are improving and successful affordable housing completions
have taken place such as 26 units at Da Vinci Court (former Prince of Wales PH) and
31 units at Senwick Road/Corrie Close. By end of March 2014 there will be a further 10
affordable homes at Great Doddington, 23 at the Old Sunlight Factory, Buckwell End
and 11 units at Palmer Court, Wellingborough completed. There are currently 108
affordable housing units on sites at Spur Road/Doddington Road Wellingborough, Dun
Cow site Wellingborough, Meadowlands Great Harrowden and the Cranwell at
Doddington Road, Wellingborough which will be completed throughout 2014.
The impact of this medium term reduction in new homes supply has lead to an increase
in costs to the Council for statutory homeless provisions. The lack of one bed provision
Planning Committee
30 April 2014
53 of 105
and availability of ground floor, wheelchair with housing support has restricted the
Council's ability to find accommodation for people who the Council has a statutory duty
towards e.g. single people with mental health, drug and alcohol (dual diagnosis) and
physical disability.
There is also a lack of two bedroom properties which is compounded further by the
under-occupancy changes implemented through the Welfare Reform Act. This lack of
supply of two beds could further increase the costs to the Council for statutory
homeless as housing association's pursue evictions. Most families who seek help from
the Council are given financial assistance to access the private rented sector; again
there is a lack of two bed stock in the private rented sector.
The housing register refresh this year to ensure only those in housing need are
registered shows at week ending October 2013 of the 482 people registered, 27% are
working, 35% are unemployed and 16% who are retired. Analysis undertaken shows
those working would qualify for shared ownership products and market homes if there
was a supply of one and two bed properties and they could access mortgage products.
Changes to commissioning services, budget allocation from Health to Social Care and
2nd tier local Authority grant to Social Care for statutory functions ie. disabled facilities
grants/aids and adaptations, have the potential to increase the number of older or
disabled people in accommodation which is not suitable to meet their needs if
adaptations cannot be provided. There are 8763 pensioner households in the Borough
at as 2011 which is expected to rise by 22.7% by 2021 to 10,752 and 2,226 people
aged 18-64 with a moderate or serious personal care disability in 2012 is predicted to
increase to 2335 by 2020 (www.pansi.org.uk vers7 produced 23/04/13).
Overall Housing Mix (not just affordable)
The Strategic Housing Market Assessment (SHMA) 2012 (table 5.12b page 147)
updated using the Housing Vision Needs Assessment Toolkit 2013 identifies that the
following breakdown of units is required to meeting projected housing requirements
2011-2031:
Predominantly 1 bed (apx 90%)
Some 2 bed (9%)
No three bed
Some 4 bed (1%)
This clearly demonstrates across the Borough there is a higher need for smaller units,
and this is particularly reflected in the affordable housing need. This is likely to be
reinforced with the advent of Welfare Reforms and the under occupancy changes with a
likely increase in demand in the private rented and social housing sectors, for affordable
accommodation in smaller units, including bedsits and single rooms in shared houses.
There are also a growing number of older single people or couples living in family social
rented homes who would benefit from a development of this type freeing up scarce
social rented family homes.
Tenure of property - Affordable Units
The SHMA (2012) identifies that the following breakdown should be applied to meet
affordable housing needs:
Planning Committee
30 April 2014
54 of 105
- 77% social rented
- 18% affordable rented
- 5% shared ownership
Therefore in terms of affordable housing delivery the split between rented and
intermediate should comprise a split based on the above.
This development in conjunction with WP/2014/0030a/FM will contribute to meeting this
need.
Given the nature of the development, the housing needs which exist in the Borough and
the support services required for vulnerable people it is recommended that communal
space be provided which would enable the residents within the scheme to have a
meeting place and access to communal facilities for lunches or meals and
bathing/shower facilities; such a space could be made available to non residents given
the demographics for the elderly population and those with personal care needs.
Conclusion
The proposals are considered acceptable and have the support of the housing service.
A S106 agreement should be drawn up ensuring in perpetuity that the units are
affordable houses and that some communal facilities should be provided in each
development for the benefit of the occupants.
9. BCW Design and Conservation Officer - having had the opportunity of considering
this scheme at an early stage and as a result of successful design negotiations, I
confirm that the form and appearance of both developments (fronting Broad Green and
at the rear accessed off Knights Court) are now acceptable in design and conservation
terms. In my opinion, they meet the statutory test of preserving the character and
appearance of the adjacent conservation area and listed buildings.
10. BCW Project Co-ordinator - request for financial contributions towards War
Memorial and Broad Green Improvement schemes.
11. Wellingborough Norse - request for a financial contribution towards the provision of
refuse receptacles.
12. The occupiers of nos. 6, 8, 9 and 10 Wharton Close raised objection to the
proposal. The proposed apartments are in close proximity to their bungalows and as
they are being constructed over several floors, privacy would be compromised.
Suggestion for car parking to occupy the perimeter of the site rather than building. The
dust from demolition and construction would be a health hazard.
13. Petition against the development signed by residents of Wharton Close, Broad
Green and Alliance Terrace.
14. Geoff Taylor of no. 3 Harrowden Gardens - I have no objection to the proposed
uses for the site. However the Town Centre Action Area Plan proposes (Policy WTC
21) that a footpath/cycleway should be provided from Gold Street to St Johns Street,
and beyond. The route should be (WTC21 ii) well lit at night.
I understand a part of this route is being provided in developing the adjoining site
Planning Committee
30 April 2014
55 of 105
(former Dun Cow PH). The proposals for developing the Railway Club site do not
provide for the continuation of this route to Outlaw Lane. The rearward site (0030)
shows an access onto Outlaw Lane. However, it does not appear that even pedestrians
could pass directly through the development from Knights Court, let alone cyclists.
Neither the Design and Access Statement nor the Transport Assessment acknowledge
this proposal, or seek to explain how its purpose is otherwise going to be achieved. The
Transport Assessment gives the impression that existing footpath and highway
provision adequately meet the needs of pedestrians and cyclists. However there is
clearly a problem with cyclists using the footway just south of the site, where it is
extremely narrow. Cycling up High St is an unpleasant experience because of the steep
gradient, poor road surface (recent part resurfacing greatly appreciated) and relatively
high vehicle speeds, especially in the vicinity of the fast angled left turn north of
Jacksons Lane. When a pedestrian, I find crossing the St Johns St junction with High St
extremely awkward because the road layout allows southbound traffic from Broad
Green to turn left into St Johns St at considerable speed, many or most without using
the left indicator.
I am asking that both 0029 and 0030 should be rejected in favour of proposals which
provide a footpath/cycleway route consistent with WTC 21, and well lit. In respect of
both the present scheme and any alternative, bearing in mind the high stone wall on the
north side of Outlaw Lane, any scheme should provide adequate visibility at the junction
with Outlaw Lane.
ASSESSMENT:
The Planning Policy Context
At the heart of the NPPF is a presumption in favour of sustainable development. For
decision-taking this means approving development proposals that accord with the
development plan. The NPPF encourages the reuse of brownfield sites such as this to
provide new housing. The application site is a brownfield site by definition and as it is
located in the Town Centre, which is accessible, then the proposed development
passes the sustainability test and is consistent with the NPPF.
The NPPF echoes the statutory provision under Section 38(6) of the Planning &
Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 replaces section 54(A) of the Town & Country Planning
Act 1990 and states that if regard is to be had to the development plan for the purpose
of any determination under the Planning Act, the determination must be made in
accordance with the plan, unless material considerations indicate otherwise.
The application site is adjacent to the Town Centre Conservation Area and within one of
the identified Town Centre Mixed Use Areas. Its also forms part of Site A on the
Proposals Map for the Town Centre, which is designated for predominantly residential
development. Under Policy PS8, there is a requirement for the proposal on the Railway
Club site to provide attractive frontage to Broad Green. The site is part of at an
identified gateway to the town centre. Any scheme coming forward in this important
location must therefore be of the highest quality and respect the historic character of the
area. The design in respect of the proposal together with the care facility proposal
fronting Broad Green meet the requirements of the relevant Town Centre policies.
Policy 13(f) of the NNCSS and the NPPF generally seek to retain community facilities
such as recreational/leisure facilities. As this facility has been vacant for some time and
Planning Committee
30 April 2014
56 of 105
there are alternative facilities within the town, its loss would not be problematic. In any
case, the prevailing development plan provision, which designates the site for housing
development should take precedent.
Character and Appearance and the Effect on the Conservation Area
Policy WTC 12 and guidance within the Conservation Area Appraisal both seek the
retention of buildings of townscape merit as they make an important contribution to the
character of the area. The existing buildings and other structures on the site have no
architectural merit and their replacement with a development that enhances the
appearance of the area ought to be embraced.
Policy PS 8 seeks that the development of Sites A and B should be co-ordinated to
provide for predominantly residential mixed use development to include new high
quality north south pedestrian and cycle route lined by active building frontages.
Redevelopment must be undertaken to a high design quality and a perimeter block
urban design arrangement has been provided with active frontages defining the public
realm.
An assessment of the proposal and in particular its impact on the adjacent
Conservation Area has to be made in relation to the surrounding development. The
development at Knights Court and at the Dun Cow Public House site which is under
construction provide suitable reference points for the development of this site.
The design of the buildings picks on the characteristic features of the recently
completed development and refurbishment at Knights Court and is also similar to the
adjoining care facility. The external façade consists of a combination of render,
brickwork and cast stone. The roof profiles for all the developments are similar, as are
their fenestration in terms of vertical emphasis of the openings.
Section 72(1) of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990,
refers to the duty of the decision maker to pay special attention to the desirability of
preserving or enhancing the character or appearance of conservation areas. The
proposed development clearly passes this statutory test. The replacement of the
existing buildings and structures with the proposed buildings would enhance the
appearance of the Town Centre Conservation Area.
Access Arrangement, Parking Provision and Highway Safety
In relation to the proposed sheltered scheme, access is taken from Knights Court,
which is cul-de-sac and currently serving 51 dwellings. There is provision for 37 car
parking spaces within the development.
The application is accompanied by a Transport Assessment indicating that the
proposed development is predicted to generate approximately 15 separate vehicle
movements associated with the residential redevelopment during the morning peak
period. The proposed development is predicted to produce less than 30 two-way
vehicle movements within any given peak hour, using conservative values. The
Department for Transport's Guidance on Transport Assessment (GTA) states that a
development which produces 30 two-way vehicle movements during any given peak
hour is unlikely to have a detrimental impact on the surrounding highway network. As a
result, it is concluded that the predicted number of vehicular trips expected to be
generated as a result of the proposed development is unlikely to have a significant
Planning Committee
30 April 2014
57 of 105
adverse impact on the adjacent highway network.
The Transport Assessment also contains accident statistics in the vicinity of the site.
Based on these recorded road traffic accident statistics, it is not considered that there
would be a specific accident problem which could be associated with the proposed
development.
The proposed redevelopment makes provision for 37 car parking spaces. As the
number of parking spaces equals the maximum allowance for unallocated car parking
spaces under the Northamptonshire Place and Movement Guide (NPMG), the proposal
complies with the Northamptonshire County Council standard.
Amenity Impact
Sufficient distance exists between the proposed building and the adjoining dwellings at
Knights Court to the north and east. Consideration has also been given to the siting
and footprint of the adjoining proposed care facility and the development under
construction at the Dun Cow PH. Overall the proposed development will return a
derelict site to a beneficial use which is compatible with the surrounding area which can
only have a positive impact upon neighbour's amenities.
Planning Obligations
Covering the following heads of terms:
- Minimum of 30% Affordable Housing provision based on the following tenure split 77% social rented (10 units);
18% affordable rented (3units); and
5% shared ownership (1 unit).
- Financial contribution towards the provision of refuse receptacles; and
- Financial provision towards improvements to the War Memorial and other Broad
Green environmental improvements.
Conclusion
The proposal maximises the potential of the site without detracting from the existing
character and the setting of the Town Centre Conservation Area and is designed to
reflect the pattern of the surrounding development. Off street car parking spaces are
provided and the scheme is designed to be safe and accessible to local facilities. The
development is carefully laid out to minimise harm to existing and future neighbours and
complies with the relevant development plan policies.
RECOMMENDATION:
Grant planning permission subject to the completion of a suitably worded Section 106
Agreement or Unilateral Undertaking and the following conditions:
Conditions/Reasons:
1. The development shall be begun no later than 3 years beginning with the date of this
permission.
Purchase Act 2004.
3. Notwithstanding any materials specified in the application form and/or the drawings,
Planning Committee
30 April 2014
58 of 105
buildings, including fenestration, windows, doors, eaves and verges shall be
4. Reason: To ensure a satisfactory appearance for the development in the interest of
visual amenity.
5. Details of those parts of the site not covered by buildings including any parking,
roads, footpath, hard and soft landscaping, surface and boundary treatments shall be
7. The proposed tree planting/landscape scheme shall be implemented during the next
planting season after the completion of the building operations on site or within any
such longer period as may be agreed in writing with the local planning authority.
Such planting shall be maintained, including the replacement of dead, dying or
defective trees, shrubs or ground cover plants for a period of 5 years.
9. No development shall take place within the area indicated until the applicant, or their
agents or successors in title, has secured the implementation of a programme of
archaeological work in accordance with a written scheme of investigation which has
been submitted by the applicant and approved in writing by the local planning
authority.
and recorded, in accordance with National Planning Policy Framework paragraph
141.
remediated in accordance with the agreed scheme prior to first occupation.
12. Reason: To protect future occupiers from the potential effect of contamination.
13. No building works which comprise the erection of a building required to be served
by water services shall be undertaken in connection with any phase of the
development hereby permitted until full details of a scheme including phasing, for the
provision of mains foul sewage infrastructure on and off site has been submitted to
and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The building shall not be
occupied until the works have been carried out in accordance with the approved
Planning Committee
30 April 2014
59 of 105
scheme.
infrastructure capacity existing for the connection, conveyance, treatment and
disposal of quantity and quality of water within the proposed phasing of development.
14. Reason: To prevent flooding, pollution and detriment to public amenity through
provision of suitable water infrastructure.
15. The car parking spaces shown on the approved drawings shall be laid out and
provided before the occupation of the dwellings and shall thereafter be kept free from
obstruction and shall be retained for parking purposes for the occupiers of the
development and their visitors.
16. Reason: To ensure adequate off-street parking provision and in order to prevent
additional parking in surrounding streets which, could be detrimental to amenity and
prejudicial to safety.
INFORMATIVE/S:
Land)
Planning Committee
30 April 2014
60 of 105
Drawing Numbers:
Date Received:
Site Location (2096-09B), 10B, 11, 12A & 13A
04/02/2014
4. Prior to occupation of the newly created premises(s), the street numbering for this
development shall be agreed with the Street Naming and Numbering Officer. When
property.
Application forms for Street Naming and Numbering are available at
5. The applicant/developer's attention is drawn to the following advice from the Police
Crime Prevention Unit:
- Communal entrance should be linked in to a communal entry system that is
capable to visual and audio to allow residents to vet visitors before allowing access.
- All Entry/Exit and individual flat doors to the houses should meet PAS 23/24 2007
or equivalent standard, which is the minimum requirement for door security (as per
window restrictors.
security reasons.
Planning Committee
30 April 2014
61 of 105
Planning Committee
30 April 2014
Case Officer Alex Stevenson
WP/2014/0068
Date received
Date valid
Overall Expiry
Ward
Wollaston
Parish
Grendon
Applicant Mr Jonathan Weekley
Location
56 Main Road Grendon Northampton Northamptonshire NN7 1JW
Proposal Erection of a rear extension and internal alterations. Replacement
windows (later date). Front porch. Shed, store, greenhouse
PLANNING HISTORY:
WP/2014/0069
Erection of a rear extension and internal alterations. Replacement
(Application for a Listed Building Consent)
WP/2014/0068
WP/2011/0349
28.09.2011
Widening existing pedestrian access to 3m to form vehicular access.
WP/2011/0348
15.09.2011
WP/2013/0552
Refused
18.12.2013
windows (later date), front porch, shed/store and associated buildings
- re-submission (Application for a Listed Building Consent).
WP/2013/0551
Refused
18.12.2013
- re-submission.
WP/2013/0240
Planning Committee
30 April 2014
62 of 105
11.07.2013
A
WP/2014/0068/F
MA
IN
RO
AD
50.3m
Grendon Hall
Grendon
Hall
(Youth Centre)
(Youth Centre)
Tennis
Courts
50.3m
58
Ha
65
ll
54
56
.4
m
59
50
53
45
41
44
Half
Moon
A
(PH)
40
40
35
a
38b
±
38
64.0m
Built Environment
Scale:
1:1,250
© Crown Copyright
Cities Revealed
GetMapping PLC 1999
Legend
WP/2014/0068/F - 56 Main Road, Grendon
Rear extension and internal alterations. Replacement windows (later
date), front porch to frontage, garage/workshop/store together with
greenhouse and shed (Application for a Listed Building Consent).
WP/2013/0239
11.07.2013
windows (later date), front porch to frontage, garage/workshop/store
together with greenhouse and shed.
WP/1994/0209
24.06.1994
Removal of interior cinder block wall
The application property is in the middle of a Grade II listed terrace of cottages set wellback for the road at the north end of the village just inside the conservation area. The
cottages have only very limited space to the rear and so their substantive garden space
is at the front.
It is proposed to erect a 3.3 m x 2.1 m shed, a small shed, a greenhouse and a pergola
structure in the front garden, and a front porch and rear extension to the building.
WP/2011/0348/F
Vehicular access and hard-standing - permitted.
WP/2013/0551; 0552/LB Previous refusals for larger 6 m x 3 m shed, etc.
Local Plan Policy G4.
North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy Policy 13.
National Planning Policy Framework.
1. Parish Council - remains concerned in principle with question of the large shed.
Happy with everything else proposed. The shed is still too large and is detrimental to
the character and appearance of the listed terrace and village conservation area. This
would set a precedent for other similar proposals elsewhere in the village.
2. Third Parties - 2 letters of objection with a similar position to the Parish Council. Feel
that the scheme fails to preserve or enhance the qualities of the area.
ASSESSMENT:
The only element of the scheme which is at issue is the large shed, as the cottage
extensions, small shed and greenhouse are unobjectionable in planning and
conservation terms.
The question as to whether the large shed would materially detract from the character
and appearance of the conservation area and the listed cottage is a matter of
judgement.
Planning Committee
30 April 2014
63 of 105
The total depth of the garden is 36 metres, a large detached frontage stone shed
already exists in front of no. 54 on the right, lateral hedging and shrubs exist across all
three properties approximately 12 metres back from the road, the slab level of the shed
is relatively low and its appearance is softened by the shiplap cladding and frontage
timber pergola.
The present shed is clearly less intrusive than the earlier refused scheme (which was
recommended for approval by officers) under reference WP/2013/0551. It is less than
half the footprint of the first one, is 3.3 m x 2.1 m as opposed to 6m x 3 m and with its
reduced roof pitch only projects 300 mm to ridge above the pergola structure which is
2.4 m in height (aligning with the eaves of the shed). The pergola also helps to screen
the shed laterally when viewed from the street.
For these reasons, therefore, it is considered that the proposals do not materially
detract from the character or appearance of the listed buildings or the conservation area
and that their respective qualities will be preserved.
RECOMMENDATION:
Grant conditional planning permission.
Conditions/Reasons:
beginning with the date of this permission.
Purchase Act 2004.
INFORMATIVE/S:
1. In accordance with the provisions in the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation
Areas) (Amendment) (England) Regulations 2012 and pursuant to paragraphs 186
and 187 of the National Planning Policy Framework, where possible and feasible,
either through discussions, negotiations or in the consideration and assessment of
this application and the accompanying proposals, the Council as the local planning
authority endeavoured to work with the applicant/developer in a positive and
proactive way to ensure that the approved development is consistent with the
relevant provisions in The Framework.
for refusal. These include specifically the following Policy: North Northamptonshire
Core Spatial Strategy, Policy 13.
3. The applicant is advised that this decision relates to the following drawing number
Drawing No. 02/D.
Date Received. 25/02/2014
Planning Committee
30 April 2014
64 of 105
Planning Committee
30 April 2014
Case Officer Alex Stevenson
WP/2014/0069
Date received
Date valid
Overall Expiry
Ward
Wollaston
Parish
Grendon
Applicant Mr Jonathan Weekley
Location
56 Main Road Grendon Northampton Northamptonshire NN7 1JW
Proposal Erection of a rear extension and internal alterations. Replacement
windows (later date).
Front porch.
Shed, store, greenhouse
PLANNING HISTORY:
WP/2014/0069
WP/2014/0068
WP/2011/0349
28.09.2011
WP/2011/0348
15.09.2011
WP/2013/0552
Refused
18.12.2013
- re-submission (Application for a Listed Building Consent).
WP/2013/0551
Refused
18.12.2013
- re-submission.
WP/2013/0240
Planning Committee
30 April 2014
65 of 105
11.07.2013
A
WP/2014/0069/LB
MA
IN
RO
AD
50.3m
Grendon Hall
Grendon
Hall
(Youth Centre)
(Youth Centre)
Tennis
Courts
50.3m
58
Ha
65
ll
54
56
.4
m
59
50
53
45
41
44
Half
Moon
A
(PH)
40
40
35
a
38b
±
38
64.0m
Built Environment
Scale:
1:1,250
© Crown Copyright
Cities Revealed
GetMapping PLC 1999
Legend
WP/2014/0069/LB - 56 Main Road, Grendon
Rear extension and internal alterations. Replacement windows (later
date), front porch to frontage, garage/workshop/store together with
greenhouse and shed (Application for a Listed Building Consent).
WP/2013/0239
11.07.2013
windows (later date), front porch to frontage, garage/workshop/store
together with greenhouse and shed.
WP/1994/0209
24.06.1994
Removal of interior cinder block wall
Note the previous related planning application on this report, reference
WP/2014/0068. The present report has identical text as the planning and
conservation issues in respect of this case are shared equally.
is at the front.
It is proposed to erect a 3.3 m x 2.1 m shed, a small shed, a greenhouse and a pergola
structure in the front garden, and a front porch and rear extension to the building.
WP/2011/0348/F
Vehicular access and hard-standing - permitted.
WP/2013/0551; 0552/LB Previous refusals for larger 6 m x 3 m shed, etc.
Local Plan Policy G4.
North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy Policy 13.
National Planning Policy Framework.
1. Parish Council - remains concerned in principle with question of the large shed.
Happy with everything else proposed. The shed is still too large and is detrimental to
the character and appearance of the listed terrace and village conservation area. This
would set a precedent for other similar proposals elsewhere in the village.
2. Third Parties - 2 letters of objection with a similar position to the Parish Council. Feel
that the scheme fails to preserve or enhance the qualities of the area.
ASSESSMENT:
The only element of the scheme which is at issue is the large shed, as the cottage
extensions, small shed and greenhouse are unobjectionable in planning and
conservation terms.
Planning Committee
30 April 2014
66 of 105
is at the front.
The present shed is clearly less intrusive than the earlier refused scheme (which was
recommended for approval by officers) under reference WP/2013/0552. It is less than
half the footprint of the first one, is 3.3 m x 2.1 m as opposed to 6m x 3 m and with its
reduced roof pitch only projects 300 mm to ridge above the pergola structure which is
2.4 m in height (aligning with the eaves of the shed). The pergola also helps to screen
the shed laterally when viewed from the street.
As suggested in the preceding report, the question of the degree of detrimental effect
that the large shed might have on the conservation area generally, and the adjacent
listed buildings specifically, is a matter of debate. The marked setting-back of the
dwelling-houses in their plots, however unusual, is not inconsistent with the vernacular
tradition which is characterized by irregularity and a sense of arbitrary change over
time. In the absence of any meaningful back gardens the cottage occupants have
understandably over time configured their frontages with hedging and planting in such a
manner as to afford reasonable privacy from the street. Also, significantly, as already
mentioned, a particularly large barn/outbuilding has already been built in front of no. 54.
The street-scene presented is, therefore, one of a mature but informal horticultural
character with the cottages forming a backdrop. It is argued, on balance, that the
introduction of a low-profile timber garden structure into the layout does not of itself
detract from the aesthetic attractiveness of the listed buildings as it will be read, when
viewed from the street, with the adjacent hedging and other lateral planting running at
right-angles across all the frontages. By the same token no such detrimental effect is
felt to be caused in respect of the conservation area in general.
RECOMMENDATION:
Grant conditional planning permission.
Conditions/Reasons:
beginning with the date of this consent.
2. Reason: In order to comply with Section 18 of the Planning (Listed Buildings and
Conservation Areas) Act 1990.
3. Full details of the following items shall be submitted for the written approval of the
local planning authority prior to the commencement of development:
(i) facing and roofing materials;
(ii) windows and doors, including details of work to existing windows;
(iii) eaves and verges;
(iv) rainwater goods;
(v) roof-lights;
(vi) pergola;
(vii) vehicular hard-standing/access.
Planning Committee
30 April 2014
67 of 105
4. Reason: In the interests of visual amenity and to protect the character of the listed
building and designated conservation area.
INFORMATIVE/S:
1. In accordance with the provisions in the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation
Areas) (Amendment) (England) Regulations 2012 and pursuant to paragraphs 186
and 187 of the National Planning Policy Framework, where possible and feasible,
either through discussions, negotiations or in the consideration and assessment of
this application and the accompanying proposals, the Council as the local planning
authority endeavoured to work with the applicant/developer in a positive and
proactive way to ensure that the approved development is consistent with the
relevant provisions in The Framework.
2. Pursuant to Section 38 (6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004, the
for refusal. These include specifically the following policy: North Northamptonshire
Core Spatial Strategy 13.
Drawing No: 02/D Date Received: 25/02/2014
Planning Committee
30 April 2014
68 of 105
Planning Committee
30 April 2014
Case Officer Paul Bateman
WP/2014/0082
Date received
Date valid
Overall Expiry Ward
19 February 2014 19 February 2014 15 April 2014 Swanspool
Parish
Wellingborough
Applicant Pastor Paul Hamilton-Testrote
Agent
Pastor Paul Hamilton-Testrote
Location First Floor 39b Cambridge Street Wellingborough Northamptonshire
Proposal Change of use from office to church and ancillary offices
PLANNING HISTORY:
WP/2014/0082
Change of use from office to church and ancillary offices
WP/2012/0500
Refused
Change of use from first floor offices to church.
19.12.2012
This application is referred to the Planning Committee for determination because
the previous application for the same development was refused by the
Committee.
As described above.
The application site is vacant first floor offices situated above an electrical retail
business.
There are some on-street parking bays in Cambridge Street, but otherwise parking in
the highway is restricted by double yellow lines.
The site is located in the town centre conservation area.
WP/2012/0500 change of use from first floor offices to church - refused for the following
reason:
1.It is considered that the application premises are unsuitable for the congregation of
persons for the purposes described and represent an unsustainable development
Planning Committee
30 April 2014
69 of 105
A
18a
18
71
35
16
13
12
3
11
R
YO
23
9
Church
ts
Fla 4
o
1 t 33a
20
29
E
CH
16
12
rks
Wo
O
KR
ER
QU
SL
E
AN
Club
63.9m
a
31
4
5
62.6m
TCB
Club
36
37
36a
37a
41
40
39
37a
35
1 to 7
37
38
39
39a
40
4
o3
41
C
t
31
a
24
26
PH
35
Th
e
33
)
31
H
(P
30
f
GLOUCESTER
PLACE
's
27
Ra
ty
f er
29
LB
28a
5
8
7
R
ST
28
4 4a
6a
CA
I
1m
61. EET
a
30
3a
6
9
R
MB
E
DG
a
35
3
5a
8b
8a
11
15
a
14
14
PH
1
19
18
27
33
1 to 9
Dexters Chambers
2
19 to
25
62.8m
18a
8
Club
PH 1
3
Works
Works
28
r
(P isp
H
in
)
20
32
MARKET STREET
22
29a
30
21 21a
29
28b
22a 23
28a
33b
32a 33
33a
34
Library
Head
Post Office
8
1
5 to
13
11
50
et
49
59
21
RO A
23
25 25a
D
53.6m
27a
27
29
31 33
35 37 39
41 43 45
47
69
44
Cities Revealed
GetMapping PLC 1999
Legend
WP/2014/0082 - First Floor 39B Cambridge Street, Wellingborough
73
to
76
20
to
23
24
43
72
1:1,250
© Crown Copyright
71
50
±
Built Environment
Scale:
17
tS
AND
TCB
a
69
16
10
ke
8
Ma
r
ne
58
La
ne
La
68
57
se
s
67
56
ee
Ch
an
Sw
66
t re
55
62
61
65
54
9
53
38
40
60
63
22
to 2
4
52
19
MID
L
64
47
Bank
14 15
13
51
13
TCBs
Bank
Bank
NK
57.9m
A
NB
ne
9
E
GL
37
La
7
3
9
Pe
bb
le
Te le
Ex c p h on e
h an
ge
17
Granville
Chambers
AD
2
A
19
ts
Fla 4
o
1t 3
3
11
3
TCB
t
ur
T
74b
to
EE
Club
7
72b
74
s1
16
t
Fla
TR
72a
73
40
S
MA
AL
40
Garage
18
Pe
Co
1
26
Hall
38
20
er
nr
e
os
14
72
22
66.8m
66.1m
1a
24
Pa rk
Stre
Me th
et
o dis
t Ch
urc h
1 to 55 (odd)
PH
2
ist e
p t cl
Ba er na
e
Th Ta b
nt
WP/2014/0082
contrary to the provisions of Policy 13 of the North Northants Core Spatial Strategy.
It is further considered that the loss of office space would have a detrimental impact on
the viability and vitality of the area.
The applicant has supplied a Planning Statement with this application which goes into
some detail with regards to the above decision; paragraph 5.1.4 of the statement is
reproduced below for information:
'The reasons for refusal on the previous scheme are without basis. There is no
evidence to demonstrate that the proposal is unsuitable, unsustainable and that it would
affect the vitality of the town centre, considering the offices were vacant for more than
three years before the current lease.'
The applicant advises that the application has been lodged to trigger an Appeal should
it be refused.
PLANNING DOCUMENTS/GUIDANCE:
National Planning Policy Framework
North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy (NNCSS): 1 (Strengthening the network
of settlements) 8 (Delivering economic prosperity) 9 (Distribution and location of
development) 13 (General sustainable development principles) 14 (Energy efficiency
and sustainable construction)
Supplementary Planning Documents:
Northamptonshire Minerals and Waste
Development Framework - Development and Implementation Principles, Sustainable
Design, Biodiversity
Wellingborough Town Centre Area Action Plan: WTC 7 Provision of cultural and leisure
facilities WTC8 Commercial fringe areas WTC12 Wellingborough Town Centre
Conservation Area
Supplementary Planning Guidance: Planning Out Crime, Parking
1. Northamptonshire County Council Highway Authority 'To ensure that highway safety is maintained, this authority recommends to the planning
authority that the highway standards and planning conditions set out in the NCC
document 'Highway Authority Standing Advice', as applicable, be applied to this
planning application.
No parking accommodation is provided within the site of the proposal and you should
satisfy yourself as to the suitability and adequacy of the means intended to be used to
serve the parking and servicing needs of the proposed development.'
2. Wellingborough Town Centre Partnership - no objection
3. Borough Council of Wellingborough Design and Conservation Officer “I note that no exterior alterations are proposed here. On this basis, there are no design
or conservation comments.”
Planning Committee
30 April 2014
70 of 105
4. Borough Council of Wellingborough Environmental Protection “With regard to the application please note these comments: as Churches are
predominantly used in the evenings and on Sundays there should be limited conflict
with other commercial premises.
However if planning permission is granted, this does not in any way indemnify against
statutory nuisance action being taken should substantiated complaints be received.
Therefore, I would recommend that a condition that restricts the hours of use may be
appropriate.”
5. Borough Council of Wellingborough Building Control - the application will require
Building Regulations. There are possible fire escape issues but without an application
and full details of occupancy the Service is unable to comment further.
6. Neighbours/Third Parties - an objection has been received from the occupier of 39
Cambridge Street who cites the following reasons for opposing the application:
- Church is already using the premises sporadically and belief it has carried out building
works
- business requires a generally quite level of background noise and loud music is
played by the Church which detrimentally affects the operation of the business
- lack of on-street parking to cope with number of church goers which leads to parking
difficulties
- concern the Church does not have appropriate insurance or fire protection
7. The applicant has supplied a rebuttal statement to the objection which goes into
detail with regards to the individual issues which have been raised:
- description of the current activities of the Church and opening hours of the objector
- dispute with regards the volume and times of singing and music playing
- building works are being carried out and details of tenancy arrangements with the
landlord of the premises landlord
- details of electrical work undertaken
- reference to previous usage of the premises and the possible number of people
involved; their effects on the objector and demand for car parking
- failure to comprehend why the insurance situation affects the objector, but insurance
cover has recently been implemented
- details supplied of fire alarms, emergency lighting extinguishers etc
- details of interaction between the applicant and the objector with regards to property
maintenance and utility supply issues
- acceptance that not everybody is happy with a church
8. Councillor G Lawman “I wish to object to the application on the same grounds as it was previously refused,
which still pertain.”
Planning Committee
30 April 2014
71 of 105
ASSESSMENT:
Main issues and material planning considerations:
- Compliance with policy
- Effect on the town centre conservation area
- Highway safety and parking
- Crime and disorder
- Biodiversity
- Effect on neighbours
Compliance with policy
The application building, perhaps unusually, has two Wellingborough Town Centre Area
Action Plan policy designations. The larger front part of the site is defined as being in
the town centre leisure quarter where Policy WTC7 is germane; and this policy is
reproduced below for ease of reference together with its explanatory text in italics:
Policy WTC 7
PROVISION OF CULTURAL AND LEISURE FACILITIES
Development proposals which enhance and diversify the range of arts, culture,
entertainment, leisure and recreational facilities are to be encouraged as an essential
element of the vision for the town centre. The scale, character, location and impact of
proposals on existing facilities should be assessed in relation to: the creation of a
Leisure Quarter, as defined on the Proposals Map, where the existing cluster of leisurerelated uses will be enhanced and particular encouragement will be given to the
provision of new restaurants (A3); he creation of a Cultural Quarter (see Policy PS10);
redevelopment and reprovision of the library as part of a new Discovery Centre or Ideas
Store on Site E2; the provision of a high quality hotel as an integrated component of the
mixed-use development of Site C, subject to satisfactory access and parking provision
(see Policy PS3); and the need to work in partnership with faith, community and
voluntary sector organisations to maintain and enhance their facilities, with particular
regard to Sites B, C, D and E2.
The various projects listed in the Policy combine to significantly enhance
Wellingborough town centre's provision of facilities for arts, culture, tourism,
entertainment, leisure, recreation and community facilities.
The creation of a Leisure Quarter is intended to enhance the attractiveness of the
existing cluster of leisure-related facilities in the Cambridge Street/Gloucester Place
area. Restaurants in particular are encouraged to address current deficiencies and
broaden the area's appeal. Pedestrian-orientated improvements will help create a
relaxing ambience.
The smaller rear portion of the building falls into WTCAAP commercial fringe area
where WTC8 is the policy designation. It too is reproduced in full with its explanatory
text for information purposes.
Policy WTC 8
COMMERCIAL FRINGE AREAS
Within the Commercial Fringe Areas, as defined on the Proposals Map, uses could
include retail (A uses), non-residential institutions (D1) and assembly and leisure uses.
Other uses should be:
Planning Committee
30 April 2014
72 of 105
i. compatible with those uses referred to above; and
ii. not result in the loss of a mix of those uses predominating at the ground floor/street
level in any one of the Commercial Fringe Areas.
Within the Commercial Fringe Areas appropriate development will, in addition to retail
uses, include other public uses such as meeting halls, health and indoor leisure
facilities. These can be easily accessible to serve the needs of users from throughout
the Borough, utilising the benefits of town centre car parking facilities and public
transport as well as more localised pedestrian and cycle access. Such activities will
contribute to the vitality of the centre especially during those periods which are outside
shopping hours'
With regards to policy WTC7 it specifically mentions arts, culture, entertainment, leisure
and recreational facilities as essential elements of the future vision of the town centre.
However, in the explanatory text to the policy it can be seen that it introduces
community facilities in the list of essential uses. It is considered that the Church is a
community facility and notwithstanding the fact that they are only mentioned in the
explanatory text and not in the main body of the policy, it is considered that the use of
the building for religious purposes is in accord with the thrust of the adopted town
centre policy.
With regards to policy WTC8 the church is a non-residential institution and as such it
falls within class D1 of the use class order which is specifically identified as an
acceptable use by the policy. In addition, it would not conflict with the aim of the policy
which seeks to prevent any use predominating at ground floor level because the Church
is located in accommodation which is at first floor level.
From the above it is clear the development is entirely in accord with the Council's own
adopted town centre policies.
Effect on the town centre conservation area
It is anticipated that a change of use will not have any material effect on the character
and appearance of the town centre conservation area.
Highway safety
The comments of the objector regarding car parking difficulties are acknowledged,
crucially however the Northamptonshire County Highway Authority has not objected to
the development. It is considered that there is adequate car parking available in the
town centre to cater for the church goers.
There are parking restrictions in the highway in Cambridge Street which can be
enforced by the agents of Northamptonshire County Council as necessary.
From the foregoing, it is expected that the application will have no material effect on
highway safety in the local highway network.
Crime and disorder
It is suggested that the use of the building as a church and by bringing additional
activity into the area at times when other nearby uses are closed could have a
beneficial effect on crime and disorder.
Planning Committee
30 April 2014
73 of 105
Biodiversity
No biodiversity issues have been identified.
Effect on neighbours
The comments of the occupier of the premises below the application site are
acknowledged.
It should be noted that the planning process regulates the use of land in the public
interest and does not exist to protect the private interests of one person against the
activities of another, although private interests may coincide with the public interest in
some cases.
The public interest may require that the interests of individual occupiers to be
considered and it can sometimes be difficult to distinguish between public and private
interests, but this may be necessary on occasion. The basic question is not whether
owners and occupiers of neighbouring properties would experience financial or other
loss from a particular development, but whether the proposal would unacceptably affect
amenities and the existing use of land and buildings which ought to be protected in the
public interest.
It can be seen from the objector's comments they do not as such relate to loss of
amenity but to the claimed disadvantageous effect on the operation of the existing
business below the Church.
The comments from the Council's Environmental Protection Service are acknowledged.
It is thought the most likely times when the Church would be operational would be
during the evenings and at weekends and in this case it is considered that it would not
be reasonable to impose an hours of operation condition which could prevent the
Church opening on a Sunday.
The Environmental Protection Service has also made reference to its powers to act if a
Statutory nuisance occurs which could be the most appropriate course of action when
the use of the building is acceptable from a planning land use perspective.
It is suggested that there is no need to impose a condition which would restrict the use
of the premises to a church only. This is because the other types of development which
could occupy the premises under the D1 use class would also be acceptable at first
floor level within the commercial fringe area of the town centre.
Conclusion
This retrospective proposal which has brought back into use a range of offices in the
town centre that were vacant for some time is considered to be acceptable.
RECOMMENDATION:
Approve.
Conditions/Reasons:
1. The development shall be carried out in accord with the following plans: 39b
Cambridge Street(over AV-Land) - Current Layout, 39b Cambridge Street (over AVLand) - Proposed Layout.
Planning Committee
30 April 2014
74 of 105
2. Reason: To define the permission.
INFORMATIVE/S:
1. Pursuant to Section 54A of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, the proposed
development has to be judged in accordance with planning policies unless material
considerations indicate otherwise. The proposal is acceptable as an exception to
local policies set out in Policy C2 of the Adopted Borough of Wellingborough Local
Plan. The particular issues relating to this property and the previous temporary
approval for the proposed use are material considerations and are sufficient to
support this proposal as an exception to policies referred to above.
Planning Committee
30 April 2014
75 of 105
Planning Committee
30 April 2014
Case Officer Erica Buchanan
WP/2014/0085
Date received
Date valid
Overall Expiry
19 February 2014 20 February 2014 22 May 2014
Ward
Castle
Parish
Applicant Mr G Morris
Agent
Miss Amy Jones
Location
County Buildings/Knapp Toolmaking Ltd
Wellingborough Northamptonshire NN8 2DP
45-51
London
Road
Proposal Hybrid Application: Development of three buildings to provide 2,086sqm
GIA foodstore (Class A1); 394 sqm (GIA) restaurant unit (Class A3/A5)
(Full Detailed Application); and a flexible retailing unit of up to 820 sqm
(GIA) (Class A1, A2, A3, A4, and/or A5) (Outline Proposal), new car
parking, landscaping and associated servicing and means of access amended plans received 14 March 2014
PLANNING HISTORY:
SCR/2013/0007
31.12.2013
Environmental Screening Report
WP/2014/0085
Hybrid Application: Development of three buildings to provide
2,086sqm GIA foodstore (Class A1); 394 sqm (GIA) restaurant unit
(Class A3/A5) (Full Detailed Application); and a flexible retailing unit
of up to 820 sqm (GIA) (Class A1, A2, A3, A4, and/or A5) (Outline
Proposal), new car parking, landscaping and associated servicing and
means of access - amended plans received 14 March 2014
WP/2010/0115
12.01.2011
Application for a new planning permission to replace an extant
planning permission in order to extend the time limit for
implementation for WP/2005/0815/F - Demolition of existing buildings
and redevelopment for bulky goods retail warehouse (Class A1) with
access, parking and servicing
Planning Committee
30 April 2014
76 of 105
WP/2014/0085/HM
±
Scale:
1:1,250
Built Environment
© Crown Copyright
Cities Revealed
GetMapping PLC 1999
Legend
WP/2014/0085/HM - 45-51 London Road, Wellingborough
WP/2010/0182
Details submitted to discharge conditions 4, 5, 6 & 7 of planning
permission WP/2005/0815/F
PRE/2013/0096
Re-development
WP/2007/0272
11.06.2007
Details pursuant to Condition 2 of Planning Permission Ref
WP/2002/0630/O for a proposed health club - Reserved Matters
Application dealing with design, external appearance, landscaping,
drainage, screen walls and fencing.
WU/1951/0010
18.04.1951
Proposed bakery
WU/1948/0010
30.07.1948
Change of use of O/P's 410 and 411 as Public Open Space to Private
Open Space
WP/2005/0815
08.05.2007
Demolition of existing buildings and redevelopment for bulky goods
retail warehouse (Class A1) with access, parking and servicing revised site layout and flood risk assessment addendum.
WU/1962/0167
09.01.1963
Extension to bakery to house motor vehicles
WU/1960/0180
08.02.1961
Bulk flour silo
WU/1953/0035
08.07.1953
Proposed bakery
WU/1951/0061
14.11.1951
Proposed bakery
WP/1991/0245
24.07.1991
Construction of warehouse/industrial buildings
BW/1989/1050
30.11.1989
Site for extension of existing bakery development.
BW/1981/0323
Planning Committee
30 April 2014
21.05.1981
Single storey extension to bakery to form warehouse and flour
mixing/blending plant (1350 m²)
77 of 105
BW/1979/1091
29.05.1980
Extension to present bakery and warehousing premises
WP/1997/0494
07.01.1998
Alter old County Building to provide smaller B2-B8 units. Use newer
unit for commercial vehicle repair, use adjoining land in connection
with both
WP/2003/0349
10.07.2003
Drawing office extension
WP/2002/0630
24.06.2004
Proposed new health club (outline application)
WP/2001/0122
New Health Club
06.06.2002
Proposal and Description of Site
The application site is a brownfield site and has formally been used for employment
land being the Knapp Toolmaking factory and former Whitworths bakery. Following
permission granted on appeal for the use of the site for bulky goods retail the building
on site have been demolished and the site currently lies vacant.
The Site measures approximately 1.832 hectares lies within the flood plain.
Opposite to the west of the site is Castlefields Retail Park and Denington Industrial
Estate. To the east is a sports ground and Whitworth Football Club, to the north is
school playing fields, and to the south is Wellingborough Football Club.
Access to both football clubs and emergency access to the sports ground will be shared
with the new Development.
Along the western boundary with London Road is a historic walkway lined by mature
trees on both sides of the footpath which will be retained in its present form and
provides a pedestrian link to the town centre.
There are good public transport links with bus stops adjacent to the site.
The application was submitted with number of supporting documents
- Design and Access Statement
- Planning Statement
- Flood risk Assessment
- Transport Assessment
- Travel Plan
- Phase 1 Contamination report
- Drainage Strategy
Planning Committee
30 April 2014
78 of 105
- Phase 1 habitat Report
- Town Centre Uses Assessment
- Employment Land Assessment
- Consultation Statement
- Aerial Tree Survey for Bats
- Arboricultural Implications Report and Tree Constraints Plano
- Sustainability Appraisal and Energy Statement
- Utility Assessment
The proposal is a hybrid application with full permission sought for the foodstore (A1
use retail outlet and drive- through restaurant (A3/A5) and outline consent for a flexible
retailing unit of within classes A1,A2,A3,A4 and/or A5 new car parking, associated
serving and a means of access.
Relevant Planning History
WP/2005/0815 Demolition of existing buildings and redevelopment for bulky goods
retail warehouse (Class A1) with access, parking and servicing - revised site layout and
flood risk assessment addendum - approved
WP/2007/0272
Details pursuant to Condition 2 of Planning Permission Ref
WP/2002/0630/O for a proposed health club - Reserved Matters Application dealing
with design, external appearance, landscaping, drainage, screen walls and fencing approved
WP/2008/0095 Insertion of 465 sq. m. mezzanine within unit 1 of consented retail
warehouse scheme (WP/2005/0815/F) - approved (subject to S106)
WP/2010/0182 Details submitted to discharge conditions 4, 5, 6 and 7 of planning
permission WP/2005/0815/F
PLANNING DOCUMENTS/GUIDANCE
Policy 8 - Delivering Economic Prosperity
Policy 11 - Distribution of Jobs
Supplementary Planning Guidance:
IV: Planning Out Crime
V: Parking
Supplementary Planning Document:
- Biodiversity
- Sustainable Design
- Trees and Landscape
- Northamptonshire Minerals and Waste Development Framework - Development and
Implementation Principles
SUMMARY OF REPLIES TO CONSULTATION
1. Anglian Water
There are assets owned by Anglian Water or those subject to an adoption agreement
Planning Committee
30 April 2014
79 of 105
within or close to the development boundary that may affect the layout of the site. The
foul drainage from this development is in the catchment of Broadholme STW that at
present has available capacity for these flows.
The sewerage system at present has available capacity for these flows. If the developer
wishes to connect to our sewerage network they should serve notice under Section 106
of the Water Industry Act 1991. We will then advise them of the most suitable point of
connection.
The surface water strategy/flood risk assessment submitted with the planning
application is not relevant to Anglian Water and therefore this is outside our jurisdiction
for comment and the Planning Authority will need to seek the views of the Environment
Agency. We will request that the agreed strategy is conditioned in the planning
approval.
The planning application includes employment/commercial use. To discharge trade
effluent from trade premises to a public sewer vested in Anglian Water requires our
consent. It is an offence under section 118 of the Water Industry Act 1991 to discharge
trade effluent to sewer without consent.
2. Town Centre Partnership - supports the application
The TCP believes that this project will complement and enhance the 'gateway'
approach into the town and further expand the retail and leisure offer for residents and
those working locally.
3. Northants Wildlife Trust - no comments received
4. Northampton Fire and Rescue - regarding Fire and Rescue, the county council has
identified that new developments and associated infrastructure within Northamptonshire
equates to an increase in population as well as traffic movements. This will inevitably
lead to an increase in the spread of community risk which places additional demands
on Fire and Rescue Service resources to ensure safe places are maintained, consistent
with national Government expectations and guidance.
Northamptonshire Fire and Rescue Service sets out its criteria for responding to
incidents within its Standards of Operational Response (SOR). The standards outline
how the Service will respond to different incident types which fall within its statutory
responsibilities under the Fire and Rescue Services Act 2004.
The projected collective growth of the county will impact on the Service's ability to
maintain Standards of Operational Response. This development will contribute to this
collective growth impact. For example:
1.Increased community risk from fire:
It is important to note that fire and rescue service provision is made on the basis of
mitigating risk. In this regard, national and local statistics show that non- residential
properties pose a risk to life from fire related incidents. Initial target attendance times for
life risk incidents have been agreed at 8 minutes from time of call to arrival at scene on
75% of occasions, and it is this target that the county needs to maintain going forward.
Planning Committee
30 April 2014
80 of 105
2.Increased community risk from road traffic collisions (RTC):
Under the Fire and Rescue Services Act 2004, Northamptonshire Fire and Rescue
Service have a statutory responsibility to respond to Road Traffic Collisions (RTCs).
The impact of growth on NFRS is not limited to that within actual residential and
commercial developments. Additional growth will create an increase in vehicles and
traffic movements that will lead to an increase in risk and activity for the Service.
Coupled with an increase in linear growth the Service will need to implement resources
accordingly to ensure response standards to RTCs are maintained.
Over the last three years (April 2009-March 2012) the Service has responded to an
average of 475 RTCs per year.
The demands on fire and rescue resources as a result of collective growth manifest
themselves in a variety of forms, dependent on the scale and nature of the proposed
development, including the need for the Service to:
- introduce new types fleet (e.g. smaller 'rapid response' initial intervention vehicles);
- add new bays to existing fire stations to accommodate additional vehicles;
- relocate or provide new response facilities (e.g. fire stations);
- introduce new types of equipment;
- reduce risk and demand through the provision of fire suppression systems (sprinklers)
in appropriate developments
From a funding perspective, current funding for NFRS is provided by the county council
through the Revenue Support Grant from Central Government, as well as Council Tax
and Business Rates funding. What the county council wishes to accentuate is that
although NFRS has appropriate revenue and capital funding streams, these only allow
the Service to maintain service delivery based on current population levels, and do not
take into account the projected growth of Northamptonshire over the next 10-15 years.
There is an identifiable funding gap on capital costs towards new infrastructure required
to meet the growth in Wellingborough and the wider area. It is important to emphasise
that new infrastructure is required because of new development, such as this nonresidential development. Should the number of non-residential developments stay the
same in Northamptonshire, the level of service currently offered would not have to be
altered. However, it is clear that this is not the case.
Further investment is required to mitigate the impact that additional demand will
inevitably place upon the service from the proposed growth. It therefore follows that
when development gives rise to increased demand for fire and rescue resources, that it
is fair and reasonable to seek contributions from developers to mitigate that impact; we
believe reasonable costs have been developed using the capital costs of providing
services to the existing population as a basis.
The county council applies a contribution rate of £145 per 100sqm of non- residential
development towards local fire and rescue infrastructure costs; this cost is based on the
current cost per 100sqm of providing Fire and Rescue services.
Planning Committee
30 April 2014
81 of 105
It is due to the need to manage community risk and maintain the Service's current
response times that the contribution requested for this development is necessary to
make the development acceptable.
Alternatively to a financial infrastructure contribution, Northants Fire and Rescue
Service would be willing to waive this charge should the developer be prepared to
install sprinkler systems throughout the new developments. Sprinklers significantly
reduce the impact on the environment and prevent major building loss; they support the
safer communities' agenda and are an integral feature of business continuity plans.
Insurance companies also offer reduced premiums for buildings fitted with sprinklers.
Commercial sprinkler systems should be installed to BSEN; 12845:2004. All sprinkler
systems must be designed, installed, commissioned and certificated by a competent
person
Sprinkler systems are a proven means of reducing the number of fire deaths and
injuries that occur within premises. Sprinkler systems are also proved to reduce the cost
of fire to business through the prevention of 'total loss' in the event of a fire and
reducing the amount of damaged caused helping to ensure business continuity.
Where the intention is not to install sprinklers NFRS request that a cost v benefit
analysis is undertaken to consider the true costs of a sprinklered building against one
built without sprinklers. This process must consider the potential arson risk of the
proposed development and the reduced build costs that a sprinklered building provides
through "trade-offs". (It is recommended that the Fire Authority is consulted during this
process so that the full benefits of "trade-offs" can be realised.)
Fire Hydrants
New developments generate a requirement for additional fire hydrants in order for fires,
should they occur, to be managed. An assessment of the site will need to be
undertaken by the Water Officer of Northants Fire and Rescue Service in order to
establish how many are required; however it is assumed this development could need 1
fire hydrant to be installed.
The hydrants should be installed at the same time as the rest of the water infrastructure
and prior to any dwellings/commercial buildings being occupied. This is to ensure
adequate water infrastructure provision is made on site for the fire service to tackle any
property fire.
The final location of the fire hydrants for this development must be agreed in
consultation with the Northamptonshire Fire and Rescue Service Water Officer prior to
installation.
Whilst the Fire Hydrant capital contribution can be secured through a planning
obligation, it is the preference of the county council that fire hydrants should be
designed into the development at the masterplan stage and enforced through a
planning condition. Below is a suggested standard condition for securing fire hydrants:
'No development shall take place until a scheme and timetable detailing the provision of
fire hydrants and their associated infrastructure has been submitted to and approved in
writing by the Local Planning Authority. The fire hydrants and associated infrastructure
Planning Committee
30 April 2014
82 of 105
shall thereafter be provided in accordance with the approved scheme and timetable.
Reason: To ensure adequate water infrastructure provision is made on site for the local
fire service to tackle any property fire.'
5. Environment Agency
In the absence of an acceptable Flood Risk Assessment (FRA) we object to the grant of
planning permission and recommend refusal on this basis for the following reasons:
Reason; The Drainage Strategy submitted with this application does not comply with
the requirements set out in paragraph 9 the Technical Guide to the National Planning
Policy Framework. The submitted Drainage Strategy does not therefore provide a
suitable basis for assessment to be made of the flood risks arising from the proposed
development. Technical Comments on Drainage Strategy (dated February 2014) The
calculated Greenfield run-off rates and proposed surface water run-off rates for the site
have been calculated incorrectly for the following reasons:
The site lies within Region 5 and not Region 4.
In calculating the allowable run-off rates from the site, the whole the site area has been
used rather than the development impermeable area (1.3ha rather than 1.1ha). The
allowable discharge rates should be based on the proposed impermeable area only,
therefore excluding gardens and public open space.
The surface water scheme proposes a 1% discharge rate for all events, which increase
surface water run-off for the lower order events. Run-off from the site should be
restricted to either, the Qbar rate for all events or the Q1 for the 100% rainfall event,
Q30 for the 3.33% rainfall event and Q100 for the 1% rainfall event using a complex
control.
The calculated Greenfield run-off rates and proposed surface water run-off rates for the
site should be reviewed and revised.
The overall surface water drainage strategy for the site (attenuation, overland flows
etc.) should be reviewed and revised based on our comments on the calculated
Greenfield run-off rates and proposed surface water run-off rates to demonstrate that
surface water run-off can be managed and the proposed surface water drainage system
can cope with a 1% year event with climate change without increasing flood risk to the
site, surrounding area and third parties.
The maintenance and adoption should be identified for every element of the surface
water system for the lifetime of the development.
Attenuation Volumes: Attenuation Volumes: Section 4.3.2 of the SUDS Manual (CIRIA
C697) refers to Development Runoff. Within this Section, it is acknowledged that
additional datasets have been added to Flood Estimation Handbook (FEH) and rainfall
depths obtained using FEH show significant differences from those obtained from Flood
Studies Report (FSR) in some parts of the country. For the Northamptonshire area,
rainfall depths are often greater using more up to date FEH datasets than those using
FSR therefore for various storm events, greater run-off is produced and additional
attenuation is likely to be required. FEH rainfall data is more up to date than FSR
(England and Wales) therefore calculations should use this FEH data to determine the
Planning Committee
30 April 2014
83 of 105
volume of surface water attenuation required on site. We recognise there are
uncertainties associated with the use of any datasets. In particular, FSR rainfall data
should be used where the critical storm is less than 60 minutes as FEH data is less
robust for short duration storms. FEH rainfall data can be used to determine the volume
of storage required if the critical storm is greater than 30 minutes. If FEH rainfall data is
not used as described above, then sensitivity testing to assess the implications of FEH
rainfall must be provided. This should demonstrate that the development proposals
remain safe and do not increase flood risk to third parties. You can overcome our
objection by submitting a FRA which covers the deficiencies highlighted above and
demonstrates that the development will not increase risk elsewhere and where possible
reduces flood risk overall. If this cannot be achieved we are likely to maintain our
objection to the application. The production of a FRA will not in itself result in the
removal of an objection.
Upon submission of a revised FRA our objection may be removed pending the
imposition of any relevant planning conditions.
Please note that our advice has not considered the risk of flooding from other sources.
Your Authority will therefore need to be satisfied that the proposed development is also
in accordance with other requirements of the National Planning Policy Framework. If
you are minded to approve the application contrary to our objection, I would be grateful
if you could re-notify us for you to explain why material considerations outweigh the
objection, and to give us the opportunity to make further representations. In the event
that the applicant appeals a refusal of the planning application or non-determination we
would be prepared to fully support the local planning authority and provide evidence at
any public inquiry or informal hearing.
6. Highway Agency
The proposed development is not expected to have a material impact on the closest
strategic route, the A45. Therefore, under Article 25 of the Town and Country Planning
(Development Management Procedure) (England) Order 2010, the Highways Agency
has no objections to the proposal
7. Northamptonshire County Council (Highways)
TRANSPORT ASSESSMENT REVIEW
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION
Comment: It would appear that the Transport Assessment has been produced in
accordance with the Department for Transport (DfT) Guidance on Transport
Assessments (March 2007), therefore please state this in the text to this section of the
report. CHAPTER 2: EXISTING SITUATION
OVERALL
Comment: Please provide information on accident data within the vicinity of the
proposed development site for the latest 5 year period. This should include a summary
table of the accident data broken down by mode of transport and accident category.
The Site
Comment: Please provide a detailed site plan of the proposed development showing
the surrounding land uses such as the Castlefields Retail Park, Wellingborough Town
Football Club and the Dog and Duck public house.
Bus Services
Comment: Please provide a map which clearly shows the location of the bus stops in
relation to the proposed development site. Rail Services
Planning Committee
30 April 2014
84 of 105
Comment: Please provide a summary table of the train services that operate from
Wellingborough Railway Station.
Comment: Please provide a map showing the location of Wellingborough Railway
Station in relation to the proposed development site.
Comment: Please include the rail timetables in the Appendices for the relevant rail
services from Wellingborough Railway Station.
Local Highway Network and Traffic Conditions
Comment: Please provide information on what type of traffic surveys were undertaken.
Comment: Please provide a map showing the location of the traffic surveys that were
undertaken. Comment: Please provide summary tables of the traffic data that was
collected.
Comment: Please add more information to Paragraph 2.26 in relation to where the
traffic flow data relates to. It has been assumed that it is for London Road, but this
needs to be clarified.
Previous Consent
Comment: Please provide a brief explanation of the relevance of this section in relation
to the proposed development CHAPTER 3: TRANSPORT POLICY
OVERALL
Comment: Please expand on the review of the relevant policy documents that have
been provided. In addition, please include a review of the Northamptonshire Local
Transport Plan (March 2013).
CHAPTER 4: DESCRIPTION OF DEVELOPMENT
OVERALL
Comment: It is accepted that the proposed level of car and cycle parking is within the
standards set out in NCC Supplementary Planning Guidance (SPG) dated March 2003,
and complies with the government planning policy to encourage solutions which support
reductions in greenhouse gas emissions and reduce congestion. It is accepted that the
number of parking spaces to be provided will be sufficient for the proposed
development.
Vehicular Access
Comment: It is noted that the site access will be signalised and linked with the existing
signalised junction serving the Castlefields Retail Park. Servicing and Refuse Collection
Comment: The information provided on servicing and refuse collection seems accurate
and acceptable.
Relocation of Bus Stops
Comment: Please provide a location map of the relocated bus stops as it is not clear
from Appendix B where the bus stops are to be relocated to.
CHAPTER 5: EFFECTS OF THE DEVELOPMENT ON HIGHWAY NETWORK
Comment: The use of the TRICS database is agreed. The selection criteria and sites
included are approved, apart from the Saturday fast food category as Irish sites have
been included in the TRICS search.
Comment: The trip rates provided in Table 5.1 seem accurate and are approved.
Comment: It is also noted that the GEA is quoted in the report whereas GFA has been
used in TRICS database. Please provide a brief explanation of the methodology that
was used in this process. Trip Type
Comment: It is agreed that trips are likely to include trips diverted from Tesco, Linked,
Pass-By and New trips. However, please provide evidence of what the percentages are
based on as there is no reference to any sort of evidence base or previous research.
Trip Distribution
Comment: Please provide more details of the methodology that was used in relation to
the trip distribution assumptions for observed movements, as it is not clear from the text
Planning Committee
30 April 2014
85 of 105
how this was achieved for each land use of the development. Traffic Impact
Comment: The impact assessment included in the report should be provided for the
estimated opening year of the development and a future year of 2026 in accordance
with NCC planning policy and guidance. The current impact assessment is not
acceptable. TEMPRO should be used to growth background traffic. This will need to be
agreed with Northamptonshire Highways.
Comment: The new access has been designed to facilitate access to the football club.
However, there is little information on attendance figures and it has been assumed that
the number of trips during the peaks associated with the football ground would be
equivalent to 10% of the site traffic. Further evidence is required.
Comment: The geometries used for junction modelling seem accurate and correct.
8. Northampton CC (Archaeology) - no comments received.
9. NCC SUDS - no comments at time of report.
10. Wellingborough Chamber of Commerce - no comments received.
11. Crime Prevention Officer
Northamptonshire Police has no formal objection to the planning application in its
present form other than to suggest that the following informatives/conditions are
included, which if implemented will reduce the likelihood of crime, disorder and antisocial behaviour occurring. This is in the interest of the security and quality life of future
occupants of the development in accordance with policy 13 of the North
Northamptonshire core spatial strategy.
This type of business will typically sell goods that are sort after and often targeted by
thieves such as cigarettes and alcohol. The building presents some issues relating to
security and crime prevention; it also has very limited surveillance from the surrounding.
These attributes could make the premises a target for burglary. The buildings would
need to be fully secured to a reasonably high standard.
The car park should be secured out of hours with a parking barrier or gate to prevent
'car clubs' from using this as a gathering point (the area next to the Service area is
particularly vulnerable as it is hidden from the road).
Bollards should be installed along the front of the supermarket to prevent ram raids;
bollards would need to be installed to PAS 68/69.
CCTV should be installed covering the car park and drive through kiosk areas. The
camera system should be capable of being enhanced during the hours of darkness with
infra red lighting or similar. Images should be stored for a minimum of 31 days and be
inline with the Home Office CCTV operational requirements manual.
If there is going to be an ATM installed it should be located inside the store, not
externally. This is for personal safety as well as reducing the incidents of tampering and
theft. This area is not well surveilled and would be an easy target for thieves/fraudsters.
External doors should comply with the Loss Prevention Certification Board (LPCB)
security standard LPS1175 SR 2 or 3 and doors manufactured in accordance with the
standard must be installed. All Glazing should be provided with security grade glazing
Planning Committee
30 April 2014
86 of 105
of P2A standard as minimum requirement.
All the buildings must have an intruder alarm system installed in compliance with
Association of Chief Police Officers (ACPO) Security Alarm Policy. This ensures that
the technical aspects of the alarm specification will result in a police response to a
confirmed activation on site. I would also suggest an internal alarm that can be zoned.
This will allow areas that are not being used to be shut down and protected. While
allowing other areas to be used.
Emergency escape doors and frames should be manufactured from steel and designed
without visible external ironmongery. Fire doors should be fitted with door contacts
linked to a 24-hour audible alarm activated on opening and/or relayed to security and
signed to prevent inadvertent or false signals.
Roller shutters must be certificated to LPS1175 SR 2 or 3 and have contacts fitted
linking them to the burglar alarm system.
Store layout should allow cashiers to see between isles to allow surveillance.
Lighting should have a good level of uniformity across the site.
Due to the lack of information pertaining to Crime Prevention and the above issues I
would suggest a condition similar to the following is added should the proposal be
approved:
Prior to the commencement of development, a scheme detailing the security standards
(including vehicular barrier) to be incorporated with the development shall have been
submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The development
shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details. Reason: This is in the
interest of the security and quality life of future occupants of the development in
accordance with policy 13 of the North Northamptonshire core spatial strategy.
All the points raised do comply with the North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy
in accordance with policy 13 and the National Planning Policy Framework. If you or the
developer would like to discuss these points raised please do not hesitate to contact
me.
12. Natural England
Statutory nature conservation sites - no objection.
This application is in close proximity to the Wollaston Meadows and the Upper Nene
Valley Gravel Pits Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSIs). The Upper Nene Valley
Gravel Pits SSSI forms part of the Upper Nene Valley Gravel Pits Wetland of
International Importance under the Ramsar Convention (Ramsar Site) and Special
Protection Area (SPA).
Natural England advises your authority that the proposal, if undertaken in strict
accordance with the details submitted, is not likely to have a significant effect on the
interest features for which Upper Nene Valley Gravel Pits Ramsar Site and SPA has
been classified. Natural England is satisfied that the proposed development being
carried out in strict accordance with the details of the application, as submitted, will not
Planning Committee
30 April 2014
87 of 105
damage or destroy the interest features for which the Wollaston Meadows and the
Upper Nene Valley Gravel Pits SSSIs have been notified. We therefore advise your
authority that these SSSIs do not represent a constraint in determining this application.
Should the details of this application change, Natural England draws your attention to
Section 28(I) of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (as amended), requiring your
authority to re-consult Natural England.
Protected species
We have not assessed this application and associated documents for impacts on
protected species please refer to Standing Advice as it is a material consideration in the
determination of applications in the same way as any individual response received from
Natural England following consultation.
Green Infrastructure
The proposed development is within an area that Natural England considers could
benefit from enhanced green infrastructure (GI) provision. Multi-functional green
infrastructure can perform a range of functions including improved flood risk
management, provision of accessible green space, climate change adaptation and
biodiversity enhancement. Natural England would encourage the incorporation of GI
into this development. Evidence and advice on green infrastructure, including the
economic benefits of GI can be found on the Natural England Green Infrastructure web
pages.
Local sites
If the proposal site is on or adjacent to a local site, e.g. Local Wildlife Site, Regionally
Important Geological/Geomorphological Site (RIGS) or Local Nature Reserve (LNR) the
authority should ensure it has sufficient information to fully understand the impact of the
proposal on the local site before it determines the application.
Biodiversity enhancements
This application may provide opportunities to incorporate features into the design which
are beneficial to wildlife, such as the incorporation of roosting opportunities for bats or
the installation of bird nest boxes. The authority should consider securing measures to
enhance the biodiversity of the site from the applicant, if it is minded to grant permission
for this application. This is in accordance with Paragraph 118 of the National Planning
Policy Framework.
Landscape enhancements
This application may provide opportunities to enhance the character and local
distinctiveness of the surrounding natural and built environment; use natural resources
more sustainably; and bring benefits for the local community, for example through
green space provision and access to and contact with nature. Landscape
characterisation and townscape assessments, and associated sensitivity and capacity
assessments provide tools for planners and developers to consider new development
and ensure that it makes a positive contribution in terms of design, form and location, to
the character and functions of the landscape and avoids any unacceptable impacts.
13. Joint Planning Unit
Thank you for consulting the JPU on this application. I have been involved in several
pre-app discussions regarding the site and the application and welcome the
improvements in the scheme following advice from the pre-app team.
Planning Committee
30 April 2014
88 of 105
Connectivity - The submitted layout is much improved and now includes a
pedestrian/cycle access point in the NW corner as well as a dedicated route from the
south and crossing point. This is important as it would provide the most direct route for
people walking or cycling from the town centre.
Quality of Public Realm
We had emphasised at pre-app that the car park needed to include more landscaping
so that it is more pleasant in its own right - trees and planting and footpaths need to
break up the parking, with clear, direct and logical routes for pedestrians to move
through the carpark and with swales/attenuation could be accommodated between the
cars and to add landscaping as below. I am delighted that these measures have been
proposed and now just need to be secured.
Continuity and Enclosure - (Surveillance, safety, front doors at the front, defined public
and private spaces) I welcome that the detailed application for the foodstore has
frontage onto London Road and the carpark which will provide frontage and animation
to the street.
Quality of Architecture
The food store is clearly a standard model. The gable end is animated by some glass,
but it is not really high quality architecture. Whilst i concede that the shops opposite are
also nothing special, and this will be set back behind the frontage trees, I do think we
should try and push for something a bit better - perhaps some timber boarding/living
walls to reflect the landscaped setting? Even Trespa panels like the restaurant would
give the scheme a bit more texture and relate to the treed setting better.
Overall though I am pleased that they have taken our comments on board so
wholeheartedly.
14. WBC Conservation and Design Officer
I note the previous pre-application consideration of this application, including iteration
with the JPU Design Service.
I have no objections to the scheme.
However, I would suggest consideration is given to increasing the coverage of the stone
cladding detail on the west elevation of the restaurant as this will be relatively prominent
in the street scene. Raising it to approximately half-way up the facade (internal ceiling
height?) would suffice.
Please attach an extra Condition to the consent requiring full details of the stonework,
including erection of a sample panel on site prior to construction.
Following amended plans
Following on from my earlier comments on 10/3/14, I confirm that the new design for
the retail unit is an improvement on the original scheme and is acceptable in design and
conservation terms.
I would reiterate, though, that consideration should be given to increasing the coverage
of the stone cladding detail on the west elevation of the restaurant as this will be
Planning Committee
30 April 2014
89 of 105
relatively prominent in the street scene. Raising it to approximately half-way up the
facade (internal ceiling height?) would suffice.
Please attach an extra Condition to the consent requiring full details of the stonework,
including erection of a sample panel on site prior to construction.
15. WBC Landscape Officer
The proposed development will result in the loss of one of the trees within The Walks
where the width of the existing access needs to be increased. It would be desirable to
provide a replacement, but this would tend to obstruct the view into the site along the
boundary.
Less significant trees are to be lost from the SE boundary. The trees along the NE
boundary are to be retained, but the retention of the silver birch referenced 4 in the
Arboricultural report may not be possible. A realistic evaluation of this has not been
presented. Section 4 of the Arboricultural report addresses arboriculturally acceptable
construction methods within the root protection area. No-dig construction of the car
park within the root protection areas is proposed and needs to be supported by a
planning condition requiring and arboricultural method statement in accordance with
BS5837. This would also address the issue of the tree roots of the lime trees in The
Walks where the paths provide pedestrian access to the site. There is a significant
change of level within the RPA.
The tree belt near the NW boundary provides useful screening and would not be
affected by the scheme.
The landscape proposals as shown are schematic and detailed design will be required
by the landscape condition. The fact that trees within the main parking area are within
shrub beds is welcomed.
The SUDS scheme should provide welcome biodiversity, but full details will be required
as part of the landscape scheme. It would appear that the proposed swale adjacent to
The Walks is partly within the root protection area and may need to be moved further
towards the proposed footpath.
16. WBC Spatial Planning
We consider that the sequential test and retail impact assessment satisfactorily
demonstrate that the harm to town centre viability and vitality will not be significant.
17. WBC Economic Development - no comments received
18. WBC Environmental Development and Protection
It is a requirement under the Construction (Design and Management) Regulations 2007
for developers during the design stage to ensure that all health and safety issues
arising out of the new development are adequately assessed.
There is currently insufficient detail contained within the design and layout plans to
determine if due consideration has been given to the intrinsic risks of vehicle and
pedestrian collisions to reduce the risks so far as is reasonably practicable. This is
usually undertaken through the completion of a site specific workplace transport risk
assessment based on HSG 136 Workplace Transport Safety.
Planning Committee
30 April 2014
90 of 105
Therefore before approval is granted the following assertions need to be clarified:
No detail is currently provided regarding the class type of vehicle to be permitted to
carry out deliveries to the various retail units, with specific regard to the 'Food Store'.
Clarification is required regarding whether 40 tonne Large Goods Vehicles or Rigid 25
tonne vehicles will be permitted to access and egress the site. Furthermore, if specific
delivery time slots will be stipulated to avoid unnecessary interaction with the general
public.
No specific detail is provided to determine whether dock levellers are to be installed to
enable delivery vehicles to off-load directly into the 'Delivery Store' of the 'Food Store' or
if Fork-Lift Trucks will be required.
Pedestrian links, pedestrian crossings, car park spaces and Trolley stores are
identified. However, no specific detail is provided in regards to the visibility of drivers
manoeuvring their delivery vehicles and vehicles entering and leaving the Sports
Ground to minimise the potential risk of vehicle collisions with pedestrians.
Comments following amended plans dated
In respect of the above planning application I have the following comments to make.
It is a requirement under the Construction (Design and Management) Regulations 2007
for developers during the design stage to ensure that all health and safety issues
arising out of the new development are adequately assessed.
There is currently insufficient detail contained within the design and layout plans and
'Swept Path Analysis' to determine if due consideration has been given to the intrinsic
risks of vehicle and pedestrian collisions to reduce the risks so far as is reasonably
practicable. This is usually undertaken through the completion of a site specific
workplace transport risk assessment based on HSG 136 Workplace Transport Safety.
Therefore before approval is granted the following assertions need to be clarified:
No detail is currently provided regarding whether delivery time slots will be stipulated to
avoid unnecessary interaction with the general public.
At present there are no specific dimensions provided within the 'Proposed Site Plan' or
'Swept Path Analysis' to adequately determine whether there is sufficient space to
safely manoeuvre delivery vehicles into and out of the service area to the 'Food Store'.
When scrutinising the current 'Proposed site Plan' it seems necessary to remove the
three remaining parking bays adjacent to the Trolley store, to provide sufficient space
for the safe manoeuvre of delivery vehicles into and out of the service area to the 'Food
Store'.
Pedestrian links, pedestrian crossings, car park spaces and Trolley stores are
identified. However, no specific detail is provided in regards to the visibility of drivers
manoeuvring their delivery vehicles and vehicles entering and leaving the Sports
Ground to minimise the potential risk of vehicle collisions with pedestrians.
I assume that these comments will be given careful consideration and the necessary
Planning Committee
30 April 2014
91 of 105
amendments requested before planning approval is granted
19. Environmental Protection Officer
I have received a copy of the Phase 1 Risk Assessment for contaminated land.
go through the assessment and make comments in due course.
I will
We have no further comments to make on other aspects of the proposals.
20. Regeneration - the Regeneration team would like to request that the following is
considered in any S106 negotiations:
- A contribution to heritage trail promotion and enhancements.
- The site encompasses the lime tree walk to the town and is a key gateway into the
town. I think a contribution towards public realm improvements for gateways.
- Cycleways improvements.
"I'd like to request that the developer submits a proposal as to how the development will
provide economic benefits to the local area in terms of skills and training provision as
well as employment and procurement initiatives. Such opportunities could include:
* Construction training initiatives - e.g. engaging local apprentices through schemes
such as Construction Futures
* Other employment initiatives - ensure that local people are in a position to compete for
any new employment that might arise as a result of development by advertising
opportunities locally and through the Council's ROSE events.
* Local procurement initiatives - e.g. advertise tender opportunities wherever possible to
achieve the procurement of construction contracts and goods and services from
companies and organisations based in the Borough."
21. Property Service - no comments received.
22. Councillor Geoff Simmons
I have no objections to the development of the Knapp Site.
23. Neighbours/Third Parties 11 Friars Close
As a committee member of Wellingborough Whitworth Football Club I would like to
make the following comments regarding the above planning application as they directly
affect the continued running of our club.
1. No access is shown to our sports ground although a pedestrian crossing point is
shown implying that the gated vehicle access has been inadvertently omitted from the
plan. It is imperative that this vehicle access is provided in order for our club to continue
with the impending erection of our new clubhouse (application 2013/0006) and the
requirements for emergency vehicles access etc.
2. We understand that the rights of way over the current access road to our ground was
part of a deal to provide a suitable replacement parking area adjacent to our ground by
the developer. This has not been recognised within the current details available.
Planning Committee
30 April 2014
92 of 105
3. The existing utility services (electricity, telephones and water) and foul drainage are
currently located through the development site. No recognition of these or continuation
of same are shown on the plan although the location of a sewerage pumping station is
mentioned in phase 1 desk study.
AFC Rushden and Diamonds - would like to pass on comments and/or observations
on the Hybrid Planning Application for the re-development of the old Knapp Toolmaking
site in London Road Wellingborough.
As you are aware AFC Rushden and Diamonds were established in July 2011 by a
dedicated group of loyal fans after the untimely demise of the original Rushden and
Diamonds Football Club the previous month. They are now fan owned with a large club
membership approaching 1000 people and have been established as a Community
Benefit organization under a 'Not for Profit' ethos with strong links to the local
community.
In July 2012, in order that they could be accepted in the ChromaSport and Trophies
United Counties Football League they entered into a long-term formal ground share
arrangement with Wellingborough Town Football Club to play at the Dog and Duck
stadium. This arrangement over the last two seasons has proved extremely beneficial
to both football clubs. The club achieved promotion at the first attempt and now play in
the Premier Division of this league, currently occupying second place, which is the
same division that Wellingborough Town play in. Both clubs play the majority of their
senior matches on a Saturday afternoon with a 3pm kick off time. In addition there are
matches played on a Tuesday evening, on a less regular basis, with a 7.45pm kick off
time. Also there are often matches on a Monday or Thursday evening on a regular
basis for both clubs Under 18 Youth teams who play in the Northamptonshire Senior
Youth League with a 7.45pm kick off time.
From it's inception AFC Rushden and Diamonds have received a strong and continued
support from it's fan base enjoying exceptional crowds that far exceed the level of
attendances usually seen at this level of non-league football. This season the club has
played to date 22 league and cup matches at the Dog and Duck stadium with an
average attendance of 494. However, Saturday attendances over 12 matches are at a
higher average attendance of 566 with the largest attendance recorded on Saturday 18
January when an impressive crowd of 948 watched an FA Vase Cup tie. These
attendances make the club the best supported in the country at Step 5 level of the
National League Pyramid System.
Turning to Turning to the Planning Application submitted by St. Modwen Developments
Ltd I have studied the information attached to this application in considerable detail and
these documents raise some concerns that the Club has particularly with regard to safe
access and egress to the stadium on match days and which I detail below:1. The proposal shows, Drawing No. A010A, that a new access to the Dog and Duck
stadium will be achieved via the new retail park access road and footway. As you are
aware, the club and Wellingborough Town have an existing access adjacent to the Dog
and Duck Public House from London Road. In addition Wellingborough Whitworth
Football Club have a separate access leading to their ground and social club. This
drawing indicates a new access to the stadium which is labelled 'proposed access to
Planning Committee
30 April 2014
93 of 105
football club'.
If it is the developer's intention that Whitworths gain access to their ground through this
proposed new access then this is totally unacceptable and unworkable to all three
football clubs. In this respect the Design and Access Statement does not adequately
address or clarify this issue to our satisfaction.
It is accepted that the new retail access road layout is broadly inline with the 2007
planning approval for this site, however, I should point out that circumstances have
changed since then with our shared occupancy of the Dog and Duck stadium. I would
also like to add that a football club representing Wellingborough has enjoyed continued
access to the stadium using this dedicated entrance from London Road since the
1890's.
The proposal also indicates that a new pedestrian footway to the retail park will be
provided from London Road. Supporters arriving on foot to the stadium will be required
to use this pedestrian footway as, apart from 4/5 registered blue badge holders, the car
park is insufficient in size to permit supporters to park their vehicles within the stadium
and they will have to make alternative parking arrangements away from the stadium.
2. Whilst accepting that the position of the new vehicular access to the Dog and Duck
stadium is in the only place possible, this is not ideal in my opinion, and gives cause for
concern regarding effective match day stewarding having due regard to health and
safety issues in respect of the supporters' safety. Currently there is sufficient space in
the car park to accommodate approximately 40 cars for players, match officials and
visiting club officials and a further 4/5 registered blue badge holders which is managed
by a team of experienced stewards. Our major concern is with unauthorized vehicles
trying to gain entry to this car park. For example, should a supporter arrive who has no
right of entry or indeed, a player and/or official arriving after we have closed the car
park because it is full then there is no turning circle for this vehicle to turn round. They
will be turned away by our stewards, resulting in them possibly stopping and reversing
away from the stadium's entrance into oncoming traffic. This may have a serious knock
on effect to the junction in London Road, which we understand will have a separate set
of traffic lights, and a possible impact on the existing junction to Castlefields Retail Park.
Bearing in mind the critical period will be between the 1pm to 3pm busy period on a
Saturday afternoon when vehicular traffic to the new retail park and drive-through fast
food outlet will be constant and this has the potential for causing major traffic
congestion in London Road generally.
3. Turning to pedestrian access there is no mention of any specific pedestrian entrance
indicated to the Dog and Duck stadium on the layout plan and any mix of vehicles and
supporters arriving on foot through the new vehicular access to the stadium would be
totally unacceptable. I would recommend that a new pedestrian entrance be
incorporated adjacent to the existing access gate to the stadium and old turnstiles.
4. At present there is a timber palisade fence approximately 2.4 metres high separating
the existing access road and car park from Whitworths access road. It is understood
that this will be removed to facilitate the new access arrangements but there is no
mention of a replacement fence on the site layout drawing. It is essential that the
football stadium remains secure at all times, and I would recommend the installation of
a Securifor 3D or similar welded mesh panel fencing to a minimum height of 2.4 metres
Planning Committee
30 April 2014
94 of 105
which has a discreet visual appeal and will have a low impact on the surrounding
environment.
5. There appears to be no mention of security gates to the new vehicular access to the
Dog and Duck stadium. It is imperative that the stadium remains secure at all times and
therefore a pair of lockable gates to match the proposed fencing should be provided to
the vehicular access with a matching personnel lockable gate to the proposed new
pedestrian entrance. Without these gates visitors to the retail park might be tempted to
use the stadium car park as an overspill parking area.
6. Although I appreciate that consideration cannot be given to the matter of on site
construction activities by the planning authority I believe that both clubs will be anxious
to ensure that the developer meets his obligations under the Construction (Design and
Management) Regulations 2007 in respect of adequate programming, production of
method statements, risk assessments and related health and safety issues to ensure
that any disruption and risk to supporters is minimized and doesn't impact on our match
day operations.
Our football club recognise that the re-development of this vacant brown fields site and
the establishment of a retail park such as this will have massive economic benefits to
the local community and they welcome that investment. They would also welcome the
opportunity to discuss these concerns with the developer at the earliest opportunity and
hope we can work together to ensure this development works well and addresses the
real concerns we have regarding access and egress to the football stadium. The
developer has recently indicated that he wishes to meet representatives of both clubs in
the near future to discuss their concerns and I am hopeful that all these issues can be
satisfactorily resolved prior to the planning committee meeting on 30 April 2014.
However, our club needs to reserve it's position at this stage in the event of agreement
not being reached on any of these matters.
Wellingborough Whitworth Football Club currently has a number of teams, 1st team,
Reserves, Under 18's, 2 x Under 16's and Under 12's. Also a local Sunday side "Exiles"
use the ground for their home fixtures. Without vehicle access this will seriously
jeopardise the future of the football club.
Reasons for objection to plans:
We need vehicle access to Whitworth Sports Ground for delivery vehicles, emergency
vehicles and vehicles for ground maintenance, also parking for players, officials and
supporters.
Access to Whitworth Sports Ground is not indicated on the drawing. However a
pedestrian crossing point is shown suggested that the gated access has been
inadvertently omitted from the drawing.
Parking for Whitworth Sports Ground. We were of the understanding that part of the
right of way agreement for using our current access drive from London Road was to
provide a suitable replacement parking area within our ground by the developer. This is
not recognised within the current available documents.
Comments to be raised:
Planning Committee
30 April 2014
95 of 105
Existing services to Whitworth Sports Ground not indicated on drawing
ELECTRICITY - supplied from the substation shown adjacent to London Road, then
underground via control/meter box situated within the footprint of the hatched unit.
Currently we have access if this trips out and we lose our electricity supply
FOUL DRAINAGE - enters existing foul sewer in London Road via gravity sewer and
rising main with pumping station within the development site (noted on phase 1 desk
study but not on current drawing).
TELEPHONES - currently the overhead lines cross the development site (no mention in
plans)
WATER - currently supplied from existing mains within the footprint of the hatched unit.
SURFACE WATER - enters existing ditch to the west of our site.
Note: this ditch has been maintained within our site but is not currently maintained by
the current landowner downstream towards the Embankment
In principal, the club feel that the development is very good for the site but feel that
slight changes to planning and consideration of all implications could benefit all parties.
Wellingborough Town Football Club
Concerned by the elimination of the 'right of way' to our ground which has been in place
for over 100 years. This 'right of way' provides our land-locked football ground a direct
route for spectators and vehicles to the main London Road.
The plan for the development does indicate an entrance to our site mid-way along a
new fence that runs along one side of our site but we have no details.
Our other concerns being
If the development should go ahead what interim measures are in place for access and
security of our site, whilst this development is in progress?
If development is established what access and route is there for pedestrians, up to
1000 from London Road
What access is there for emergency vehicles?
Access for coaches and their ability to manoeuvre onto our site would be required.
ASSESSMENT:
Main Issues and Material Planning Considerations:
- Principle of development
- Impact on Neighbour's Amenities
- Design
- Crime and Disorder
- Other considerations
Principle of development
The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) sets out the Government's planning
policy for England and Paragraph 17 sets out the twelve core principles one of which is
Planning Committee
30 April 2014
96 of 105
to proactively drive and support sustainable economic development, Paragraphs 18 22 is specific to building a strong, competitive economy where it states that the
government are committed to securing economic growth (paragraph 18) and
paragraphs 29, 30, 34, 35 seeks to encourage economic development in sustainable
locations and paragraph 58 sets out the aims that development should achieve in terms
of its design.
Retail use of the site has been established with the appeal decision in 2007 where the
Planning Inspector stated that the proposal contributes to the economic development of
the area.
Policies S1 and S2 of the Local Plan states that development should not have an
adverse impact on the vitality and viability of the Town Centre and the submitted Retail
Impact Assessment has satisfactorily demonstrated this.
The proposal includes the creation of a new access road and junction from the London
Road and would result in the moving of the bus stops. The applicants are in discussion
with NCC Highways in relation to the transport assessment.
Impact on neighbours amenities
The site lies outside any residential area and is surrounded by retail, industrial and
sports/football grounds.
The main consideration is the concern raised by the Football clubs relating to the
access.
For clarity the application is providing separate vehicular access to
Wellingborough Town Football Club and Whitworths Football Club, and following
negotiations it is confirmed that the applicant would also provide separate pedestrian
access to Wellingborough Town.
It is therefore considered that the proposal would have a minimal impact on the access
to these clubs.
Design
The North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy Policy 13 (h) and (o) states that new
development should be of a high standard of design, architecture and landscaping,
respect and enhance the character of its surroundings. This principle is also reflected
in NPPF where in considering the design of the built environment development should
contribute positively to making places better for people, and this concept is also
reflected in the guidance contained in that of the SPD: Sustainable Design.
The layout of the proposal has the food store and restaurant drive-through unit located
along the western boundary where it is considered that their position will act as a focal
point when viewed from London Road. The proposal includes additional pedestrian
links from the application site to the walkway.
The food store design has been amended to an asymmetrical design with profile clad
roof and white rendered walls interspersed with grey columns facing the car park. The
main entrance fronts London Road with glazed windows.
The drive-through restaurant is smaller in height to the food store with the main
pedestrian entrance facing the food store. The drive-through side faces London Road.
Planning Committee
30 April 2014
97 of 105
The proposal includes retaining the existing trees along the walk and additional
landscaping within the site.
The proposed flexible unit is in outline only and would be subject to a Reserved Matters
Application.
Crime and Disorder
The main entrance to the foodstore includes steel bollards separating the front of the
building from the footpath.
The crime and prevention Officer has requested a condition pertaining to security.
Whilst a request for a vehicular barrier has been suggested, the proposed drive through
would be 24 hours and therefore access to the car park cannot be restricted.
Other considerations
Flooding
The application has been submitted with a Flood Risk assessment, however the
Environment Agency have objected and the applicants are in discussions with the
Environment Agency and have submitted an amended drainage strategy for which a
response is currently awaited.
The Sustainable Design SPD emphasises the importance of incorporating energy
efficiency into the design of a building and to utilise renewable energy technologies.
Eight areas where the principle of sustainability could be delivered are set out in the
Sustainability Appraisal and Energy Statement which would be subject to further
assessment.
.
Policy 13 (o) and (p) (General Sustainable Development Principles) of the NNCSS
notes that biodiversity of the environment should be conserved and enhanced. The
Biodiversity SPD explains how biodiversity should be incorporated into the development
process to ensure that the requirements of legislation and policy are met.
It is considered that any biodiversity measures could be incorporated into a detailed
landscaping scheme.
Conclusion
The proposal would provide economic benefit to the area by the provision of
approximately 105 full time equivalent jobs or 155 total permanent jobs. It would
improve the appearance to both the site and public walkway. For the reason given
above the application is recommended for approval with appropriate conditions.
S106
Contributions have been requested from Regeneration and Fire and Rescue and the
applicants have responded with the points below
Contributions towards heritage trail promotion, public realm improvements and cycle
way improvements - during the pre-application discussions the application scheme has
developed in response to comments regarding public realm improvements, retention of
'the Walks', relationship between London Road and the development frontages,
pedestrian and cycle access and opportunities for landscaping and public realm. The
Planning Committee
30 April 2014
98 of 105
proposed development responds positively to these points and represents a significant
improvement in the appearance of this currently vacant site, pedestrian and cycle
connections, landscaping and public realm. These points are recognised in the
consultation comments received by the NNJPU which conclude that "Overall though I
am pleased that they have taken our comments on board so wholeheartedly." Given the
changes incorporated into the design of the proposed development to address these
points we do not consider that a s106 is justified in this instance.
Provision of economic benefits including construction training initiative, employment
initiatives and local procurement initiatives - these points are addressed in the Planning
Statement and also the Sustainability Statement which note the local employment
benefits that the development will provide including training initiatives, the level of jobs
that will likely be secured which is 155 new jobs, and also the important contribution
that the proposal will make to the local economy. Given the significant benefits that
would be achieved by the proposed development and also that any such initiatives will
be under the control of the future occupiers of the development we would seek to resist
any such legal agreement addressing these points.
In relation to the request from County Fire Services for inclusion of sprinklers with the
proposed development and also a new hydrant we note that there is no building
regulations requirement for sprinklers within the proposed development any such
inclusion would be to the specification and requirement of the future occupiers. We
therefore consider the request for these, or a mitigated payment in lieu, to be unjustified
through the planning process, we also consider that any request for a new hydrant
should be made through the Anglian Water who have been engaged through the preapplication process and have not highlighted any such requirement. We have reviewed
the Council's SPD and consider that there is no basis for this request, whilst we
appreciate that the County are operating through a limited budget we do not consider
this to be the correct mechanism for addressing the issue and consider this request for
S106 contributions to be unreasonable, particularly given the cost of the legal
agreement which would be required to deliver this.
No contributions are being requested for the Highways works as the applicants are
financing the new junction and highway improvements themselves.
RECOMMENDATION:
Approve with conditions Conditions/Reasons:
1. The development for the foodstore (Class A1) and drive-through restaurant (Classes
A3/A5) shall be begun not later than the expiration of three years beginning with the
date of this permission.
Reason: To comply with Section 91 of the Town & Country Planning Act 1990 (as
amended by Section 51 of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004).
2. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved plans
(Drawing numbers P030, PO40, PO41) deposited with the local planning authority on
the 20th February 2014 and amended plans (drawing numbers PO23 rev C, PO24
rev C, A007 rev A, A008 Rev H, A010 Rev H, A009 Rev H rev.)
Planning Committee
30 April 2014
99 of 105
Reason: To ensure that the development is carried out in accordance with the
approved plans.
3. Application for approval of reserved matters for the flexible mixed use unit 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 three years from the date of this permission; or
(b) the expiration of two years from the final approval of the reserved matters or,
in the case of approval on different dates, the final approval of the last such matter to
be approved.
Reason: Required to be imposed pursuant to Section 92 of the Town and Country
Planning Act 1990.
4. Notwithstanding any materials specified in the application form and/or drawings
buildings shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority
before commencement of the development. The development shall be carried out in
Reason: To secure satisfactorily appearance of the development in the interest of
visual amenity.
5. Details of those parts of the site not covered by buildings including parking, roads,
footpath, hard and soft landscaping, surface and boundary treatments shall be
submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority before
Reason: To ensure that the site is satisfactory landscaped and in order to maintain
6. The proposed tree planting/landscaping scheme shall be implemented during the
next planting season after the completion of the building operations on site or within
any such longer period as may be agreed in writing with the local planning authority .
Such planting shall be maintained, including replacement of dead, dying or defective
trees, shrubs or ground cover plants for a period of 5 years.
Reason: To ensure the site is satisfactorily landscaped and in order to maintain
7. Before development commences details of measures to prevent a net loss of
biodiversity on the site shall be submitted to the local planning authority for approval
in writing. The development shall be carried out in accord with the approved details.
Reason: In the interests of ensuring there is not a net loss of biodiversity on the
site.
8. Prior to commencement of development, a scheme detailing the security standards
to be incorporated with the development shall have been submitted to and approved
Planning Committee
30 April 2014
100 of 105
in writing by the local planning authority. The development shall be carried out in
Reason: In the interest of security and quality life of future occupants of the
development in accordance with Policy 13 of the North Northamptonshire Core
Spatial Strategy.
INFORMATIVE/S:
1. Anglian Water has assets close to or crossing this site or there are assets subject to
an adoption agreement. Therefore the site layout should take this into account and
accommodate those assets within either prospectively adoptable highways or public
open space. If this is not practicable then the sewers will need to be diverted at the
developers cost under Section 185 of the Water Industry Act 1991. or, in the case of
apparatus under an adoption agreement, liaise with the owners of the apparatus. It
should be noted that the diversion works should normally be completed before
development can commence.
An application to discharge trade effluent must be made to Anglian Water and must
have been obtained before any discharge of trade effluent can be made to the public
sewer.
Anglian Water recommends that petrol/oil interceptors be fitted in all car
parking/washing/repair facilities. Failure to enforce the effective use of such facilities
could result in pollution of the local watercourse and may constitute an offence.
Anglian Water also recommends the installation of a properly maintained fat traps on
all catering establishments. Failure to do so may result in this and other properties
suffering blocked drains, sewage flooding and consequential environmental and
amenity impact and may also constitute an offence under section 111 of the Water
Industry Act 1991.
Planning Committee
30 April 2014
101 of 105
Planning Committee
30 April 2014
FOR INFORMATION
Case Officer Paul Bateman
Date received
Date valid
30 January 2014 30 January 2014
WP/2014/0037
Overall Expiry
Ward
21 February 2014
Parish
Applicant Mr Paul Cartmell
Agent
Alice Darrington
Location 100 Wollaston School Irchester Road Wollaston Wellingborough
Northamptonshire NN29 7PH
Proposal External refurbishment to the existing science block, including recladding, a new step and ramped access, air conditioning unit,
maintenance store and the demolition of a bio-chemical store.
PLANNING HISTORY:
WP/2014/0015
Installation of two Portakabin modular buildings to be used as four
temporary classrooms during refurbishment of the existing science
block.
WP/2014/0037
26.03.2014
External refurbishment to the existing science block, including recladding, a new step and ramped access, air conditioning unit,
maintenance store and the demolition of a bio-chemical store.
WP/2012/0569
23.01.2013
Proposed re-cladding of 2 storey science block.
WP/2009/0008
12.02.2009
To provide 8 no. duty columns, 10m high with floodlights on top,
around the existing netball courts to provide all year usage.
WR/1956/0090
20.05.1957
Caretakers house
WR/1960/0056
Planning Committee
30 April 2014
27.06.1960
102 of 105
WP/2014/0037/C
16
CIS D
ICKIN
S CL
O SE
15
B
2
56
9
FRAN
Towe
r
13
3
1
87
5
7
El
GP
86
90.3m
1
Th
o
ch
eS
o
o
lH
us
e
b
Su
a
St
Works
2
wr
LT
4
Tennis Court
13
6
wr
LT
s
6a
1a
1
8
2
3
HEATHERS
El Sub Sta
s
12
12
14
a
12
25
10
11
15
14
Wollaston
35
20
32
37
37a
±
Scale:
1:1,250
Planning & Local
Development
© Crown Copyright
Cities Revealed
GetMapping PLC 1999
Legend
30
THE
6
7
34
WP/2014/0037/C - Wollaston School, 100 Irchester Road, Wollaston
Cott
39
16a
16
17
18
Extension
WR/1955/0120
16.04.1955
Modern school
WR/1971/0109
Enlargement of site
WR/1957/0172
New access
WR/1959/0166
05.02.1958
18.02.1960
Swimming pool
WR/1964/0039
11.05.1964
Two-storey and single-storey extension
WP/2000/0061
01.01.2000
Two-storey science block extension and single-storey extension and
single-storey design/ technology block extension, twenty new car
parking spaces and demolition of existing building
WP/1997/0396
20.10.1997
Single-storey pitched roof brick clad building for school 6th form for
approx 460 pupils
WR/1960/0141
Small hall and dining room
BW/1975/0883
Extension to humanities block and additon of physical education
building to provide 420 addional places to 1170
WP/2007/0368
25.06.2007
Installation of a double mobile classroom unit.
WP/2006/0406
21.07.2006
To install a double mobile classroom.
WP/2004/0530
13.08.2004
Proposed canteen extension.
WP/2004/0650
28.09.2004
Proposed lighting to existing M.U.G.A.
WP/2003/0297
Planning Committee
30 April 2014
18.06.2003
103 of 105
Construction of a floodlit multi use games area.
WP/2002/0704
04.12.2002
Change of use of the Caretakers House from residential to an
inclusion unit for the school
WP/2002/0279
22.05.2002
Erection of dance, drama, music and teaching block
WP/2001/0520
10.10.2001
Siting of a mobile classroom
NOTE:
Approved by Northamptonshire County Council on 4th March 2014 subject to the
following condition/s:1. Time Limit
The development to which this permission relates must be begun not later than the
expiration of three years beginning with the date of this permission.
Reason: To conform with the requirements of Section 91 of the Town and Country
Planning Act 1990 as amended by the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004.
2. Scope of the Permission
Except as otherwise required by conditions attached to this planning permission the
development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following
approved documents:
(a) Application Forms dated 16 January 2014;
(b) Design and Access Statement dated December 2013;
(c) Drawing P01 Rev A - Location Plan;
(d) Drawing P03 Rev A - Proposed Site Plan;
(e) Drawing P06 - Proposal Layout Plan;
(f) Drawing P08 - Proposal Elevations; and
(g) Drawing P09 - Proposal Elevations - Window & Door References.
Reason: To specify the approved documents in the interests of amenity with regard to
Policy 13 of the North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy (2008).
3. Materials
The materials to be used in the refurbishment of the external surfaces of the
development hereby permitted shall be in accordance with those detailed in the
application.
Reason: In the interest of the appearance of the school and the visual amenities of the
area having regard to Policy 13 of the North Northamptonshire Core Spatial Strategy
(2008).
REASONS FOR APPROVAL
The proposals are for the re-cladding and replacement doors and windows to Wollaston
Planning Committee
30 April 2014
104 of 105
School's science block, with additional external alterations to include stepped and
ramped accesses, replacement of bio-chemical store with a bunded bio-chemical unit
and the installation of an air conditioning unit. It is considered that the proposed
development with not have any significant adverse impacts on the amenities of the local
area. The proposals are therefore considered acceptable having regard to Policy 13
(General Sustainable Development Principles)of the North Northamptonshire Core
Spatial Strategy (2008).
POSITIVE AND PROACTIVE MANNER STATEMENT
In determining this planning application the County Planning Authority has worked with
the applicant in a positive and proactive manner by assessing the proposals against
relevant Development Plan policies, all material considerations and consultation
responses. This approach has been in accordance with the requirement set out in the
National Planning Policy Framework, as set out in the Town and Country Planning
(Development Management Procedure) (England) (Amendment No.2) Order 2012.
Planning Committee
30 April 2014
105 of 105
PLANNING COMMITTEE - 30 April 2014
The following applications dealt with under the terms of the Head of Planning and
Local Developments delegated powers.
WP/14/00181/LN
Applicant Openreach
Location
Opp 39, Doddington Road, Wellingborough, Northamptonshire.
Proposal
Installation of cabinet
Decision
Application Permitted
WP/14/00182/LN
Applicant Openreach
Location
O/S Harmony Care
Northamptonshire.
Proposal
Decision
125-127,
Midland
Road,
Wellingborough,
WP/14/00183/LN
Applicant Openreach
Location
S/O 65 Champman
Northamptonshire.
Proposal
Decision
Road,
The
Embankment,
Wellingborough,
WP/14/00184/LN
Applicant Openreach
Location
Opposite 75, Earls Barton Road, Great Doddington, Wellingborough.
Proposal
Decision
Prior Notification Not Required (BCW)
WP/14/00191/AMD
Applicant Mr Akins, Homelets Associates
Location
16-17 Broad Green, Wellingborough, Northamptonshire, NN8 4LN.
Proposal
Non material amendment to planning permission ref: WP/2007/0755/F to introduce an additional exit door at the rear of the building at ground
floor. To introduce a fire vent at high level on the flank wall of the
building.
Decision
WP/14/00194/AMD
Applicant Mrs Melanie Cabley, Redrow Homes South Midlands
Location
Land rear of 1 to 73, Compton Way, Earls Barton, Northampton.
Proposal
Non material amendment in relation to reserved matters approval
WP/2012/0443/RMM - to replace two 4 bed houses with two 1 bed
bungalows on plots 23 and 24
Decision
WP/14/00195/LN
Applicant Openreach
Location
Opposite 1 Rectory Lane, Rectory Lane, Orlingbury, Kettering.
Proposal
Decision
Application Approved
WP/14/00197/LN
Applicant Openreach
Location
Opp 1A London Road, London Road, Bozeat, Wellingborough.
Proposal
Decision
WP/14/00198/LN
Applicant Openreach
Location
S/O 81 Queen Street, Queen Street, Bozeat, Wellingborough.
Proposal
Decision
WP/2013/0621
Applicant Mr David Heed
Location
Sub Station, Eastfield Road, Wellingborough, Northamptonshire.
Proposal
Conversion of disused electricity substation into a 2 bedroom dwelling amended plans
Decision
WP/2014/0006
Applicant Mr Angus Gunning, Whitworths Holdings Limited
Location
All of Site, 347 Brookside Garage, Wellingborough Road, Finedon.
Proposal
Retention of planning permission WP/2008/0553/F without compliance
with condition 1 - Continuation of use of the site to provide self contained
industrial/workshop and storage units as fenced open store compounds temporary permission WP/2008/0553/F expires on 31 January 2014.
Decision
Approved with Conditions
WP/2014/0012
Applicant Ms V Dunne
Location
6, High Street, Finedon, Wellingborough.
Proposal
Single storey side extension
Decision
WP/2014/0018
Applicant Mr Jeet Sohal, Acca Land Limited
Location
10 Pizza Hut, High Street, Wellingborough, Northamptonshire.
Proposal
Conversion from a single dwelling above the Pizza Hut into 2 separate
residential duplex apartments
Decision
WP/2014/0021
Applicant Mr & Mrs Mears
Location
5, Poplar Close, Irchester, Wellingborough.
Proposal
Pitched roof over new porch
Decision
WP/2014/0022
Applicant Mr & Mrs A D Windatt
Location
46c, Oxford Street, Wellingborough, Northamptonshire.
Proposal
Demolition of existing former dance studio. Construction of new four
storey residential building.
Decision
WP/2014/0023
Applicant Mr & Mrs Chisholm
Location
58, Glenfield Drive, Great Doddington, Wellingborough.
Proposal
Front extension to ground and sub ground floor
Decision
WP/2014/0032
Applicant Mr & Mrs Derek Pouncey
Location
9, Avenue Road, Finedon, Wellingborough.
Proposal
Retention of planning permission WP/2013/0163/F with either removal of
variation of condition 3 - removal of condition or to remove a section of
existing wall to the right of the driveway by 4.8m wide to allow for an off
road parking space at an angle to the property/highway which would also
provide visibility splays either side of 2.4m x 2.4m
Decision
WP/2014/0035
Applicant Mr Chris Billson
Location
Wellingborough Golf Club, 1 Harrowden Hall, The Slips, Great
Harrowden.
Proposal
Variation of Condition 1 of Listed Building Consent, Ref: WP/90/0481/LB
concerning the removal of the bronze statues
Decision
WP/2014/0038
Applicant Mr Gerald Rebhan
Location
Land rear of 1 & 3, Newton Road, Wollaston, Wellingborough.
Proposal
The erection of a detached house with parking and garden (outline
application with all matters reserved except access)
Decision
Application Refused
WP/2014/0040
Applicant Mr A Diu, Oradi Limited
Location
29, Park Road, Wellingborough, Northamptonshire.
Proposal
Rear single storey staff and waste skips secure store (detached). The
above to be accommodated in the rear garden with the staff wing at a
right angle to the two modified/extended buildings which were granted
planning permission WP/2013/0584 dated 24.12.13. The staff wing is to
be located along and adjacent to the boundary with 14 Havelock Street
and the skip store at a right angle to it on the rear of the site all to
minimise the impact on 27 Park Road.
Decision
WP/2014/0042
Applicant Mr T & R Betts
Location
Land at rear of, 42-54, Broad Street, Earls Barton.
Proposal
Construction of 2 No. semi-detached houses and conversion of
redundant two-storey workshop into 1 no. dwelling unit incorporating offroad parking
Decision
WP/2014/0043
Applicant Mr F Gould
Location
Garden land at, 1, Fourth Avenue, Wellingborough.
Proposal
Erection of a detached dwelling on land rear of no. 1 Fourth Avenue
Decision
WP/2014/0045
Applicant Mr & Mrs Hector
Location
146, Wellingborough Road, Earls Barton, Northampton.
Proposal
Erection of detached garage - amended plan
Decision
WP/2014/0046
Applicant Mr James Huckerby, David Wilson Homes
Location
Land off, Bourton Way and Chippenham Close, Wellingborough,
Northamptonshire.
Proposal
Temporary sales centre and sales signage to include sales office car
parking, railings and landscaping in relation to decision notice
WP/2013/0228/RM
Decision
WP/2014/0047
Applicant Mr James Huckerby, David Wilson Homes
Location
Land off, Bourton Way and Chippenham Close, Wellingborough,
Northamptonshire.
Proposal
Temporary sales centre and sales signage to include sales office car
parking, railings and landscaping in relation to decision notice
WP/2013/0228/RM
Decision
WP/2014/0048
Applicant Mr & Mrs R Hillier
Location
32, West Street, Earls Barton, Northampton.
Proposal
Single storey rear extension
Decision
WP/2014/0049
Applicant Mr & Mrs R Hillier
Location
32, West Street, Earls Barton, Northampton.
Proposal
Single storey rear extension (Application for a Listed Building Consent)
Decision
WP/2014/0050
Applicant Sylvia Tilaks
Location
28, Earls Barton Road, Mears Ashby, Northampton.
Proposal
Rear extension
Decision
WP/2014/0055
Applicant Bedford Properties Limited
Location
Land Adjacent 67, Harvey Road, Wellingborough, Northamptonshire.
Proposal
Erection of one detached single storey dwelling with two parking spaces
Decision
WP/2014/0057
Applicant Mr Martyn Hope
Location
49, West Street, Ecton, Northampton.
Proposal
Extensions and alterations to convert existing outbuilding to an
osteopathy studio
Decision
WP/2014/0058
Applicant Mrs E Brookes
Location
2, Hornby Road, Earls Barton, Northampton.
Proposal
Installation of a new bay window and porch extension on front elevation
Decision
WP/2014/0063
Applicant
R D White & Partners
Location
East Lodge Farm, Washbrook Lane, Ecton, Northampton.
Proposal
Application for a prior notification for a proposed agricultural building
Decision
WP/2014/0064
Applicant R D White & Partners
Location
East Lodge Farm, Washbrook Lane, Ecton, Northampton.
Proposal
Prior approval of proposed change of use of agricultural building to A1
(shop)
Decision
Prior Approval Not Required
WP/2014/0070
Applicant Mr Alex Calvert, Santander
Location
38, Market Street, Wellingborough, Northamptonshire.
Proposal
Non material amendment to planning permission ref: BW/1988/0832 for
relocation of ATM due to external works.
Decision
WP/2014/0071
Applicant Mr & Mrs Burton
Location
8, Easton Way, Grendon, Northampton.
Proposal
Erection of a single storey side extension to the main dwelling and a new
detached open garage with store room.
Decision
WP/2014/0072
Applicant Mr & Mrs Tsang
Location
27, Moreton Avenue, Wellingborough, Northamptonshire.
Proposal
Application for a lawful development certificate for a proposed
development - erection of single storey rear extension
Decision
WP/2014/0073
Applicant Mr Miles Dilkes
Location
33, Third Avenue, Wellingborough, Northamptonshire.
Proposal
Erection of a two storey side and single storey rear extension
Decision
WP/2014/0080
Applicant Mr Martin Keightley
Location
8, Townley Way, Earls Barton, Northampton.
Proposal
Erection of first floor side extension over garage forming bedroom and
bathroom, plus single storey rear extension forming store
Decision
WP/2014/0081
Applicant Mr Eugene Torlôt
Location
8a, Pytchley Road, Orlingbury, Kettering.
Proposal
Erection of a single storey front extension
Decision
WP/2014/0083
Applicant Mr E Heffernan
Location
78 Samarinda, Hardwick Road, Wellingborough, Northamptonshire.
Proposal
Erection of a new detached garage and associated alterations
Decision
WP/2014/0084
Applicant Mr Thind, Rimcity Ltd
Location
Rimcity Ltd, 1, Eastfield Road, Wellingborough.
Proposal
Demolition of existing single-storey retail unit, erection of a two-storey
side extension to the existing dwelling and a two-storey additional
dwelling.
Decision
Application Refused
WP/2014/0092
Applicant Mr & Mrs Rachael Tilley
Location
10, Blackmile Lane, Grendon, Northampton.
Proposal
Demolition of existing concrete prefab garage and erection of a pitched
roof, rendered garage in a similar position
Decision
WP/2014/0095
Applicant Mr S Piercey
Location
26, Knox Road, Wellingborough, Northamptonshire.
Proposal
Change of use from offices to three no. apartments - amended scheme
following approval of planning permission ref no. WP/20130/129/FCOU
Decision
WP/2014/0101
Applicant Simon Rhodes, Gaskell Building Surveying Limited
Location
First and Second Floor, 1a Granville Chambers, Midland Road,
Wellingborough.
Proposal
Prior notification to carry out change of use from B1 to C3
Decision
Prior Approval Not Required
WP/2014/0107
Applicant Mr & Mrs Peter Smith
Location
31, St Katharines Way, Irchester, Wellingborough.
Proposal
Construction of a single storey rear extension
Decision
WP/2014/0109
Applicant Mr Toby Pateman
Location
7, The Knoll, Grendon, Northampton.
Proposal
Replacement of roof including a steeper pitch and associated
alterations/accommodation
Decision
WP/2014/0110
Applicant Mr Stephen Jackson
Location
23, Windermere Drive, Wellingborough, Northamptonshire.
Proposal
Erection of garden fence (1m in height)
Decision
WP/2014/0112
Applicant Mr Alan Gould
Location
1, North Road, Earls Barton, Northampton.
Proposal
Demolition of existing single storey side extension, conservatory and
existing external stores and construction of single storey rear extension,
reconstruction of side extension with 1st floor side extension above.
Decision
WP/2014/0115
Applicant Mr Graham King
Location
7, Westminster Road, Wellingborough, Northamptonshire.
Proposal
Removal of existing 2.2m high wall. Erection of 1.95m high wooden
fence along boundary, adjacent to footpath, extension of existing fence to
meet new fence.
Decision
BACKGROUND PAPERS
The background papers for the planning and building applications contained in this report
form part of the relevant files appertaining to individual applications as referenced.
Borough Council of Wellingborough, Planning and Local Development, Swanspool House,
Doddington Road, Wellingborough.
PLANNING COMMITTEE - BUILDING REGULATION DECISIONS ISSUED
Date: 16/04/2014
Application No. BN/2014/0703
Proposal:
Wall removal
Location:
81 Great Park Street Wellingborough Northamptonshire NN8 4DP
Decision:
Accepted
Decision issued: 14 March 2014
Proposal:
Attic conversion
Location:
130 Wellingborough Road Earls Barton Wellingborough Northamptonshire
Decision:
Accepted
Application No. EL/2014/0711
Proposal:
Rewire the property and install New Consumer unit to comply with BS7671
IEE Wiring Regulations 17th Edition
Location:
6 Manor Close Irchester Wellingborough Northamptonshire NN29 7ED
Decision:
Accepted
Application No. FP/2014/0712
Proposal:
Single storey rear extension to create a new wetroom
Location:
2 The Sorrels Isham Wellingborough Northamptonshire NN14 1HU
Decision:
Approve conditions BCW
Application No. DI/2014/0713
Proposal:
Aperture for through floor lift
Location:
58 Thrush Lane Wellingborough Northamptonshire NN8 4TF
Decision:
Accepted
Proposal:
Single storey rear extension and refurbishment of existing extension
Location:
58 Fullwell Road Bozeat Wellingborough Northamptonshire NN29 7LY
Decision:
Proposal:
Partial garage conversion and re-config of existing WC / utility / kitchen /
dining room
Location:
12 Feast Field Close Wollaston Wellingborough Northamptonshire
Decision:
Accepted
Proposal:
Proposed new dental surgery
Council Offices, Swanspool House, Doddington Road, Wellingborough, NN8 1BP
Tel: 01933 229777 www.wellingborough.gov.uk
Location:
4 Farm Road Wellingborough Northamptonshire NN8 4UF
Decision:
Approved
Decision issued: 8 April 2014
Proposal:
Single storey extension to rear
Location:
44 Eastfield Road Wellingborough Northamptonshire NN8 1QU
Decision:
Accepted
Proposal:
Thermal upgrade
Location:
25 Doddington Road Wellingborough Northamptonshire NN8 2JG
Decision:
Accepted
Proposal:
Construction of mezzanine floor in the stairwells of two adjacent office
buildings, requiring removal
Location:
Units 4 - 5 Regent Park 37 Booth Drive Wellingborough Northamptonshire
NN8 6GR
Decision:
Proposal:
Construction of a first floor extension to rear of property and internal
alterations
Location:
30 South Street Isham Kettering Northamptonshire NN14 1HP
Decision:
Proposal:
Detached garage with rooms over
Location:
40 Mears Ashby Road Wilby Wellingborough Northamptonshire NN8 2UQ
Decision:
Accepted
Proposal:
Single storey extension to front of house
Location:
5 Wimpole Wellingborough Northamptonshire NN8 3TQ
Decision:
Accepted
Application No. PS/2014/0731
Proposal:
Erection of 17 affordable dwellings serviced via a new access from Keats
Way including car parking, landscaping and all ancillary and enabling works
Location:
Land To The North And 41 Keats Way Rushden Northamptonshire
Decision:
Proposal:
Change existing garage into a room. Requires access to be made from the
adjoining house and brick up the garage door and install a window.
Location:
112 Brickhill Road Wellingborough Northamptonshire NN8 3JP
Decision:
Accepted
Proposal:
Location:
8 Lowry Close Wellingborough Northamptonshire NN8 4UY
Decision:
Proposal:
Conversion of garage into kitchen / dining space
Location:
42 Duck End Wollaston Wellingborough Northamptonshire NN29 7SH
Decision:
Accepted
Proposal:
Wall removal to rear addition. Roof light to rear addition.
Location:
27 Whernside Wellingborough Northamptonshire NN8 5QQ
Decision:
Accepted
Proposal:
Single storey extension and continuation of hipped roof
Location:
20 New Street Earls Barton Northampton Northamptonshire NN6 0NN
Decision:
Proposal:
Loft conversion and replacement doors and windows
Location:
12A Ranelagh Road Wellingborough Northamptonshire NN8 1HZ
Decision:
Accepted
Proposal:
Steel beam in lounge dividing two rooms, wooden beam in kitchen, to place
steel to support chimney in kitchen, rebuild back wall, replace door and PVC window
Location:
32 Northampton Road Wellingborough Northamptonshire NN8 3HG
Decision:
Accepted
Proposal:
New detached house
Location:
Genevieve The Green Great Bowden Market Harborough Leicestershire
Decision:
Proposal:
Wall removal
Location:
21 Castle Street Wellingborough Northamptonshire NN8 1LW
Decision:
Accepted
Proposal:
Create en-suite. Raise arch of chimney breast
Location:
43 Eastfield Road Wollaston Wellingborough Northamptonshire
Decision:
Accepted
Proposal:
New triple garage with first floor granny annex over garages
Location:
Lyndhurst 41 Debdale Road Wellingborough Northamptonshire NN8 5AJ
Decision:
Proposal:
Flat roof rear extension to Bungalow
Location:
18 Grange Road Wellingborough Northamptonshire NN9 5YQ
Decision:
Approved
Proposal:
Construction of a single-storey ground floor extension to rear of property and
internal alterations. Works comprise provision of level access shower and ground floor
bedroom accommodation.
Location:
19 Abbey Road Wellingborough Northamptonshire NN8 2JW
Decision:
Approved
Proposal:
Re-roof, existing slates to be changed for 'glendyne' Canadian natural slate.
Insulate between rafters. Install 2 conservation rooflights
Location:
23 Hickmire Wollaston Wellingborough Northamptonshire NN29 7SL
Decision:
Accepted
Proposal:
Installation of a woodburner / multi fuel stove
Location:
48 Bradshaw Way Irchester Wellingborough Northamptonshire NN29 7DP
Decision:
Accepted
Proposal:
Extension for downstairs toilet
Location:
7 Devonshire Close Wellingborough Northamptonshire NN8 5QF
Decision:
Accepted
Proposal:
Mixed use development
Location:
High Street Wellingborough Northamptonshire
Decision:
Proposal:
Loft conversion
Location:
79 Torquay Gardens Ilford Essex IG4 5PU
Decision:
Proposal:
To remove existing roof tiles and battens, supply and fit new tiles, felt and
battens
Location:
28 Elizabeth Way Earls Barton Northampton Northamptonshire NN6 0LE
Decision:
Accepted
Proposal:
Bathroom conversion to level access shower room
Location:
5 Garden Fields Court Arkwright Road Irchester Wellingborough
Northamptonshire NN29 7HA
Decision:
Accepted
Proposal:
Location:
15 Sweetacre Close Grendon Northampton Northamptonshire NN7 1JJ
Decision:
Accepted
Proposal:
Location:
1 Walkers Way Finedon Wellingborough Northamptonshire NN9 5LN
Decision:
Accepted
Proposal:
Location:
52 Milner Road Finedon Wellingborough Northamptonshire NN9 5LW
Decision:
Accepted
Proposal:
Location:
8 Alliance Court Wellingborough Northamptonshire NN8 4QH
Decision:
Accepted
Proposal:
Construction of new dwellings
Location:
Land Adjacent Corn Mill Close Irthlingborough Road Wellingborough
Northamptonshire
Decision:
Proposal:
Two detached dwellings and associated garaging
Location:
31A Hillcrest Rising Greenfield Avenue Northampton NN3 2AA
Decision:
Proposal:
Garage conversion
Location:
14 Severn Close Wellingborough Northamptonshire NN8 5WF
Decision:
Accepted
Proposal:
Single storey extension to back of house
Location:
53 Glenfield Drive Great Doddington Wellingborough Northamptonshire
NN29 7TE
Decision:
Accepted
Proposal:
Thermal upgrade throughout. Bathroom to first floor. New replacement
window to rear bedroom.
Location:
57 College Street Wellingborough Northamptonshire NN8 3HF
Decision:
Accepted
Proposal:
The Humanities block is a three storey building with the first floor and second
floor blocks in the block and beam floors failing. We are overboarding the floors to spread
structural load and installing a mesh to the underside of the floors where required. We are
repairing the roof to the Humanities block by overboarding and using a single ply
membrane and laying only a single ply membrane to the ADT and Music blocks. Internally
we are installing new door leafs where required due to the overboarding of the floors and
decorating as necessary.
Location:
Parker E-Act Academy Ashby Road Daventry Northamptonshire NN11
0QF
Decision:
Approved
Proposal:
Reroof
Location:
27 Hawthorne Road Finedon Wellingborough Northamptonshire NN9 5DR
Decision:
Accepted
Proposal:
Installation of downstairs W/C with associated drainage and steelwork
Location:
14 Beech Crescent Irchester Wellingborough Northamptonshire
Decision:
Accepted
Proposal:
Installation of steel beams in lounge and kitchen. Alteration of drains in
kitchen and new floor.
Location:
6 Church Lane Bozeat Wellingborough Northamptonshire NN29 7LJ
Decision:
Accepted
Proposal:
Conversion of bathroom into a shower room
Location:
16 Fowey Close Wellingborough Northamptonshire NN8 5WW
Decision:
Accepted
Proposal:
Level access shower room
Location:
23 Charles Robinson Court Gillitts Road Wellingborough Northamptonshire
Decision:
Accepted
Proposal:
Concrete kitchen floor
Location:
7 Stanley Road Wellingborough Northamptonshire NN8 1DY
Decision:
Accepted
Application No. FP/2014/0202/
Proposal:
Extension - Link Ext
Location:
Redwell Infant And Junior School Barnwell Road Wellingborough
Northamptonshire NN8 5LQ
Decision:
Approved
Proposal:
Single storey front extension
Location:
5 Poplar Close Irchester Wellingborough Northamptonshire NN29 7BT
Decision:
Proposal:
Two storey side and single storey rear extensions
Location:
33 Third Avenue Wellingborough Northamptonshire NN8 3ND
Decision:
Approved
Application No. PS/2014/0620/
Proposal:
Location:
167 Clements Road Eastham London
Decision:
Approved
Application No. PS/2014/0619/
Proposal:
Creation of 8 No. Dwellings
Location:
Land On The Corner Of Manton Road & Grove Road Rushden
Northamptonshire NN10 0JT
Decision:
Proposal:
New detached dwelling
Location:
Land Adjacent 5 Dychurch Lane Bozeat Wellingborough
Northamptonshire
Decision:
Proposal:
Single storey extension
Location:
12 Priory Road Wollaston Wellingborough Northamptonshire NN29 7PW
Decision:
Approved
Proposal:
Proposed flat roof rear dormer extension forming larger bedroom 2 and
ensuite to bedroom 1
Location:
23 Monks Road Wollaston Wellingborough Northamptonshire NN29 7PP
Decision:
Approved
Application No. BN/2014/0698/
Proposal:
Re-roof to flats
Location:
38 - 43 The Willows Little Harrowden Wellingborough Northamptonshire
Decision:
Accepted
Proposal:
Loft conversion to form two bedrooms
Location:
49 Prospect Avenue Irchester Wellingborough Northamptonshire
Decision:
Approved
Application No. PS/2013/3590/A
Proposal:
Single storey extension and alterations
Location:
Units 44-50 Chantry Centre Andover SP10 1RN
Decision:
Proposal:
Proposed rear single and two storey extension and garage
Location:
27 London Road Wollaston Wellingborough Northamptonshire NN29 7QP
Decision:
Approved
Proposal:
New food technology classroom and decks (2nd floor) over mathematics
classrooms (1st floor) and existing kitchens (ground floor)
Location:
Wellingborough School Irthlingborough Road Wellingborough
Northamptonshire NN8 2BX
Decision:
BC INDEX
Received Appeals
Appeal Site
Ref. No.
Date
Received
Status
Land between and
to rear of 145 & 153
Station Road
Earls Barton
WP/2013/0457/OM
21 March 2014
Statement to be
sent
Land off Hillside Close
Bozeat
WP/2013/0332/OM
27 March 2014
Statement to be
sent
Land west of
123 High Street
Irchester
WP/2013/0590/OM
4 April 2014
Statement to be
sent

Planning Committee - Agenda and reports 30 April 2014

Transcription

Similar documents

Schottenstein Center

Parking Lot Striping - Parking Control Unit

Pencader Corporate Center

college official`s report curry college

Event Parking

August 2015 ECRC-Parent Link Centre Stepping Stones Society

Municipal Parking

Retail Space for Lease 1911 Wilshire Boulevard Santa Monica, CA

125 Wilson St. W #106, Ancaster L9G 0B9 Property Feature Sheet

Yateem Legacy Shopping Center