Agenda and minutes

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Aziz, Davies, Golby and Hibbert.

The minutes of the meeting held on 15 November 2011 were agreed and signed by the Chair.

Councillor Mason declared a Personal interest in item 10D- N/2011/1062 as being known to the applicant.

Councillor Meredith declared a Personal interest in item 10D- N/2011/1062 as being known to the applicant.

Councillor Hallam declared a Personal interest in items 12A- N/2011/1074 and 12B- N/2011/1147 as being a substitute member of WNDC’s Northampton Planning Committee.  

Councillor Flavell declared a Personal interest in items 12A- N/2011/1074 and 12B- N/2011/1147 as being a member of WNDC’s Northampton Planning Committee.  

Report of Head of Planning (copy herewith)

The Head of Planning, Transportation and Regeneration submitted a List of Current Appeals and Inquiries and elaborated thereon.

None.

None.

None

None.

Report of Head of Planning

(copy herewith)

Ward: St James

The Head of Planning submitted a report in respect of application no N/2011/1001 and elaborated thereon.

The Committee discussed the application.

RESOLVED:     That the application be approved subject to the conditions set out in the report as the proposed development by reason of its scale, siting and design would have no adverse impact on the street scene or character of the wider area. The proposal would therefore comply with Policies E20 and E29 of the Northampton Local Plan and aims of PPS1 and guidance in the Council’s Shop front Design Guide.

An Addendum of further information considered by the Committee is attached.

Report of Head of Planning

(copy herewith)

Ward: Nene Valley

The Head of Planning submitted a report in respect of application no. N/2011/0458, elaborated thereon, noted that in paragraph 2.1 the width of the proposed house would be 6.4 metres rather than 7 metres and referred to the Addendum that set out further representations from residents of Martins Lane and Ansell Way and made reference to a letter submitted by the Applicant that set out responses by a chartered town planner to the objections to the proposal.

Councillor Nunn, a Ward Councillor, commented that the objections to the proposal by residents and the Parish Council focussed on the effect of terracing by putting three houses together and the issue of extending beyond the building line. He referred to the Northampton Local Plan and the importance of safeguarding the symmetry and appearance of the area. Councillor Nunn asked that the Committee consider the impact of the proposal.

Mr Barten, the Chair of Hardingstone Parish Council, commented that the Parish Council in particular objected to the extension beyond the building line of properties further to the west along Martins Lane. They believed that there would be visibility issues at the junction of Martins Lane and Ansell Way and had further concerns in respect of the scale of the development, the increase in building density, fencing to the garden boundary and that the scheme represented detrimental backland development contrary to Policy H10 of the Northampton Local Plan. 

Mr Waine, agent for the applicant, commented that the application was compliant with the Council’s current policies for residential development in an area zoned for residential use. There were a mix of properties in the area and the proposal would be within the building line of Ansell Way but would extend slightly beyond that in Martins Lane. There would be no change in visibility at the junction of Ansell Way and Martins Lane and there had been no Highway objection. The proposal did not include fencing to the boundary. Mr Waine believed that most of the objections were either irrelevant or misguided. He concurred with the appraisal in the report and requested that the application be approved.

The Head of Planning commented that Policy H10 which referred to backland development did not apply in this instance and that in terms of Policies H6 and E20 the proposal was deemed to be compliant. He confirmed that there was no proposal to fence to the boundary of the site and referred to the proposed Condition 4 set out in the report that would restrict this in any case. In answer to questions, the Head of Planning noted that the concept of a building line was purely notional and although the properties to the west along Martins Lane were on generally the same alignment, given the separation from those properties and the scale of the proposal it was believed that its effect would be neutral and was, therefore, acceptable. 

The Committee discussed the application.

RESOLVED:     That the application be approved subject to the conditions set out in the report  ...  view the full minutes text for item 10a

Report of Head of Planning

(copy herewith)

Ward: Headlands

The Head of Planning submitted a report in respect of application no. N/2011/0889, elaborated thereon and in particular commented that the rear access of properties in Fullingdale Road would be maintained and that the first floor windows on the gable ends of the terrace would be high level with obscured glass.

Mr Smith, the agent, commented that the development was proposed to be for affordable housing to be built to Code 3 Sustainability standard and that considerable efforts had been made to establish good relations with neighbours. In answer to a question Mr Smith commented that lighting to the pedestrian access would be provided if required by the Police Secure by Design advisor.

The Committee discussed the application.

RESOLVED:     That the application be approved subject to the conditions set out in the report as the proposed development would respect the character and appearance of the locality and would not significantly adversely impact upon the amenities of surrounding residential area and would not be prejudicial to highway safety. For these reasons, the proposal would accord with the thrust of saved Policy H6 of the Northampton Local Plan and PPS1, PPS3 and PP13.

Report of Head of Planning

(copy herewith)

Ward: Delapre and Briar Hill

The Head of Planning submitted a report in respect of application no. N/2011/1003 and elaborated thereon.

The Committee discussed the application.

RESOLVED:     That the application be approved subject to the conditions set out in the report as the proposed development would respect the character and appearance of the locality and would not significantly adversely impact upon the amenities of surrounding residential and would not be prejudicial to highway safety. For these reasons, the proposal would accord with the thrust of saved Policy H6 of the Northampton Local Plan and PPS1, PPS3 and PP13.

Report of Head of Planning

(copy herewith)

Ward: Talavera

The Head of Planning submitted a report in respect of Application no. N/2011/1062, elaborated thereon and referred to the Addendum that set out additional representations by the Highway Authority, Public Protection, an objection from the British Sub Aqua Club and set out recommended conditions if the Committee were minded to approve the application. He noted that in respect of the British Sub Aqua Club’s objection that Asset Management had confirmed that they only had rights of access to their premises and had no ownership rights, that the specification of the access road was a matter for the Highway Authority and that they were correct in respect of the use of the land but that the applicant could negotiate something different with Asset Management; this in itself was not a planning matter. 

The Committee discussed the application.

RESOLVED:   That the application be approved subject to the outstanding highway matters being satisfactorily resolved, the conditions set out in the Addendum and amended conditions in respect of Crime and Safety as the proposed development would respect the character and appearance of the locality and would not significantly adversely impact upon the amenities of surrounding residential and would not be prejudicial to highway safety. For these reasons, the proposal would accord with Policy H6 of the Northampton Local Plan and PPS1, PPS3, PPS5 and PP13.

None

None.

Report of Head of Planning

(copy herewith)

Ward: Sunneyside

The Head of Planning submitted an application in respect of N/2011/1074, elaborated thereon and referred to the Addendum that set out the Transport Assessment conducted by the Applicant and also referred to a letter from Mr Baker, the Chair of St David’s Residents Association, commenting upon the impact on congestion in the area and the belief that the proposal was for the wrong type of development in the area.  .

Mrs Masters, a local resident, commented that she was very concerned about the proposal in terms of its detrimental scale and its impact on congestion in the area. Despite what the Applicant claimed students would still bring their cars to the area and put further pressure on on-street parking. The proposal was out of keeping with the surrounding Victorian houses. She believed that there would be additional noise from taxis picking up and dropping off students. She understood that although the Applicant had stated that they were in partnership with Moulton College, the College had in fact denied this. Mrs Masters referred to the University’s plans to build student accommodation in the Town Centre. She noted that the proposal was for bedsits with shared kitchens and that these would not be suitable for other uses. Mrs Masters referred to a previous application several years previously which had been refused partly on grounds of scale and that had been smaller than the current proposal. 

Mr Baker, Chair of the St David’s Residents Association, asked that the Committee object to the application. He had spoken to other residents and shop owners and had not yet found anyone who was in favour of the proposal. He believed that the Applicant’s suggestion to restrict students from bringing their cars with them would be unenforceable.

The Head of Planning noted that the previous application referred to by Mrs Masters had been for 155 flats with 177 car parking spaces and would have been 17.5metres tall at the Bective Road end and 12 metres at the Yelvertoft Road end as compared with 22 metres in respect of the current proposal. 

The Committee discussed the application.

RESOLVED:     That WNDC be informed that the Council raise the strongest possible objections to this wholly inappropriate proposal, by reason of its siting, design and scale it would have an adverse impact upon residential and visual amenity and therefore fails to comply with the requirements of PPS1 and PPS3 and Local Plan Policies E20 and H6.

                              WNDC are recommended to conduct a site visit before considering the application.

                             However, should WNDC be minded to approve the application, it is requested that the following matters be taken into account prior to a decision being reached:

·        An updated contamination assessment be secured, taking into account recent changes to best guidance and potential changes to the use of the land subsequent to the carrying out of the assessment. This is necessary to ensure that the proposal accords with the requirements of PPS23 – Planning and Pollution Control

·        Any agreement requiring that the future  ...  view the full minutes text for item 12a

Report of Head of Planning

(copy herewith)

Ward: Castle

The Head of Planning submitted a report in respect of Application no. N/2011/1147, elaborated thereon and referred to the Addendum that set out comments from the Conservation Section of the Council.

Mr Quinn, on behalf of the applicant, commented that this proposal would be for a potentially significant building that could be the first constructed in the Enterprise Zone and would need to set the standard for architectural design, quality and sustainability. It would also help to kick start the regeneration of that part of the Town. The building would also have a synergy with the approved scheme for the redevelopment of Northampton Railway Station opposite. In answer to questions Mr Quinn commented that the purpose of the Innovation Centre was to take on small businesses, new businesses and help develop them, support them, introduce them to other small business that might provide complementary services so that they could work together and move them on; the project was supported by WNDC, NBC, NCC, the University and Police Authority; the preferred long term management of the building would be by the University but other models could be investigated: the external finishes would include a lot of glass and the building would be well lit: and despite the current economic climate a number of other Innovation Centres were being built around the Country.  

The Committee discussed the application.

RESOLVED:     That WNDC be informed that the Council raise no objections to the proposal as the proposed development would have a positive impact upon promoting the viability and vitality of Northampton, including the Enterprise Zone; would introduce a landmark building onto this key site and have a neutral impact upon neighbour amenity and the historic environment. The development is therefore compliant with the requirements of PPS1, PPS4, PPS5 and Local Plan Policies E20 and E40.

                                         If WNDC is minded to approve the application, it is requested that conditions requiring surveys of noise and light levels in order to ensure that the scheme is compliant with the requirements of PPS23 – Planning and Pollution Control and PPG24 – Planning and Noise. WNDC are also requested to investigate the possibilities of securing further embellishments to the front elevation of the building in order to better reflect the requirements of Local Plan Policy E20 and PPS1.