Agenda and minutes

Apologies were received from Councillors Flavell; Nazim Choudary and Lynch.

The minutes of the meeting held on 30^th September 2014 were agreed and signed by the Chair.

RESOLVED: That under the following items the members of the public listed be granted leave to address the Committee.

• N/2014/0596 Land at Sixfields Stadium

Councillor Glynane

Simon Patnick (County Developments)

• N/2014/0619Raeburn School, Raeburn Road 

Mark Preston (RDC Ltd, Agent)

Councillor Sarah Uldall

• N/2014/0951Land adjacent to 25 Penfold Lane          

Councillor Palethorpe (Ward Member)

John Marlow (Billing Parish Council)

Alan Price (Resident)

John Holman (Applicant)         

• N/2014/0956Clyde House, Southfields Barn, Southfields Community Centre

Councillor Meredith (Ward Member)

Toby Birch (Community Spaces Northampton)

Angela Paterson (Community Spaces Northampton)

Patrick Dooley (Agent)

• N/2014/0987Former Ashtree Service Station, 237 Main Road,

Councillor Golby (Ward Member)

Francis Jones (Duston Parish Council)

Councillor Hadland

Nick Sanders (Resident)

Graham Price (Agent)

• N/2014/1000 Café Facility, Radlands Skate Park

Hema Patel (owner of Ark Restaurant)

Councillor Ford declared a personal, non-prejudicial interest in Item 10a; in that he is a member of the Northampton Town Football Club Supporters Trust. He could however approach the matter with an open mind, without any predetermination or prejudice.

Councillor Golby declared a pecuniary interest in Item 10c; as a member of Northamptonshire County Council and the Cabinet Member responsible for Education. He would leave the room for the duration of the item.

Councillor Golby declared a prejudicial interest in Item 10f as he was the Ward Councillor who called in the original planning application.  He would address the Committee as the Ward member and then leave the room for the remainder of the item.

Councillor Palethorpe declared a personal and prejudicial interest in item 10d; as the ward member he had discussed and advised local residents regarding the application. He would address the Committee as the Ward member and then leave the room for the remainder of the item.

Councillor Meredith declared a personal and prejudicial interest in item 10e; as the ward member he had discussed and advised local residents regarding the application. He would address the Committee as the Ward member and then leave the room for the remainder of the item.

Councillor Meredith declared a personal interest in item 10g; as the ward member he had met the nursery operator. He could however approach the matter with an open mind, without any predetermination or prejudice.

None.

Report of the Director of Regeneration, Enterprise and Planning (copy herewith)

The Director of Regeneration, Enterprise and Planning submitted a List of Current Appeals and Inquiries. The Development Manager introduced the written report and elaborated thereon.

RESOLVED: That the report be noted

None

None

The Principal Planning Officer outlined the report of the Director of Regeneration, Enterprise and Planning.

The committee discussed the report.

RESOLVED: That the application be APPROVED, subject to the conditions set out in the report

This item was heard immediately after 10f on the agenda.

The Development Manager outlined the report of the Director of Regeneration, Enterprise and Planning, as set out in the agenda. The recommendation was for approval of the application subject to the conditions as set out in the report.

The Chair invited Hema Patel to address the committee. Ms Patel explained that the proposed location of the extension would obscure the view of the barrier entrance from her premises. The view of the skate park would also be obscured to those using her business. She would be happy if the extension went in any other direction.

The Development Manager reminded the committee that they should consider the application before them and not alternative schemes.

The committee discussed the report.

RESOLVED: That the application be APPROVED subject to the conditions set out in the report.

The Development Manager outlined the report of the Director of Regeneration, Enterprise and Planning, as set out in the agenda. The recommendation was for approval of the application subject to the conditions as set out in the report.

The Chair invited Councillor Golby to address the committee. He drew the committee’s attention to the Inspector’s report when granting the application, specifically set out in the agenda at 7.2. He explained that resident concerns over potential anti-social behaviour had not eased. He believed the application was premature and would be more appropriate when the store was in operation and noise could be more effectively monitored and reviewed.

Councillor Golby left the room for the remainder of the item.

The Chair invited Frances Jones, Chair of Duston Parish Council (DPC), to address the committee. She explained that the DPC had review the application and found they could not accept the proposed change of hours. This was in the main a residential area and the additional trading hours could create problems with congregation outside the premises and the noise that would be generated.

The Chair invited Councillor Hadland to address the committee. Councillor Hadland explained that he had called in the application for committee to consider. There had been widespread local unease at the original proposal, but the Planning Inspector had granted the application with conditions, including the limited opening hours. No consideration had been given to noise generated by pedestrians just away from the site, but near residential properties.

In response to a question from the committee Councillor Hadland advised that there was small commercial with limited impact locally.

The Chair invited Nick Sanders to address the committee. Mr Sanders explained that he lived directly opposite the site. Mr Sanders pointed out that despite the Planning Inspectors decision on opening hours, the operator had applied for a Premises Licence to sell alcohol from 06:00 – 00:00. While local residents accepted that the site had a previous use as a garage, that business never traded beyond 19:00, on Sundays and closed one day during the week. This new shop was to be one of 9 convenience stores in the Duston area.

In response to questions from the committee Mr Sanders supplied the following information:

·         The car park to the store would be lit by approximately 6 new street lights.

·         The bus stop outside the site had previously attracted some anti-social behaviour and been the subject of a dispersal order.

The Chair invited Graham Price, Agent for the applicant, to address the committee. Mr Price highlighted the Planning Inspector’s view that he had required “new substantive information” and that the noise survey was that information. He confirmed that the hours now requested were exactly as originally proposed for the premises.  

In response to questions from the committee Mr Price supplied the following information:

·         The only variation to the conditions applied to the opening hours.

·         He did not believe it would attract new customers, but increase the local retail offer.

·         This would be a local  ...  view the full minutes text for item 10f

The Development Manager outlined the report of the Director of Regeneration, Enterprise and Planning, as set out in the agenda and addendum. In addition, two other objections received from 45 Farmhill Road and 7 Ludlow Close were reported. She also drew attention to paragraph 7.6 of the report which should also relate to 7 Oak Park Close. The recommendation was for approval of the application subject to the conditions as set out in the report.

The Chair invited Councillor Meredith to address the committee. Councillor Meredith expressed his unhappiness at the ruling regarding members not having the opportunity to ask questions following his submission. The Chair noted his objection, but pointed out that Councillor Golby had been bound by the same ruling on the previous item. Councillor Meredith explained the inaccuracies highlighted by the applicant regarding Southfields Focus in the addendum had been corrected. He believed the Community Centre to be a vital hub for Southfields and if the application was granted there was a risk this could be lost. He added that there were issues of noise from the Centre which would impact on any potential occupiers of the proposed development. He also believed that the site visit should have included the Community Centre itself.

Councillor Meredith left the room for the remainder of the item.

The Chair invited Toby Birch, Chair and Trustee of Community Spaces Northampton (CSN), to address the committee. Mr Birch explained that this was one of eight centres that CSN had managed since 2012. He outlined that 530 people used the centre each week, across 43 sessions. He believed that the building work proposed would be so disruptive as to potentially force some groups to stop operating. This in itself could impact on its long term viability.

In response to questions from the committee Mr Birch supplied the following information:

·         The proposal site had been empty for 2 years and previously used as storage.

The Chair invited Angela Paterson, of Community Spaces Northampton (CSN), to address the committee. Ms Paterson believed that access to the car park was limited to existing leaseholders and this did cover the developer of the neighbouring properties. She highlighted potential issues around the safeguarding of the children using the playgroup and the noise issues from users of the Centre impacting the new properties. She urged the community to refuse the application due to the likely detriment to the wider community.  

In response to questions from the committee Ms Paterson supplied the following information:

·         The site had 12 parking spaces.

The Chair invited Patrick Dooley, the Agent for the applicant, to address the committee. Mr Dooley pointed out that the site was part of a group of barns which had already been converted. The current use for storage allowed unlimited hours of use, access and traffic movements. If the building was made use of commercially then the impact could be substantially more than the proposed development. He noted that the application was in line with planning policy and urged the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 10e

The Development Manager outlined the report of the Director of Regeneration, Enterprise and Planning, as set out in the agenda. The recommendation was for approval of the application subject to the conditions as set out in the report.

The Chair invited Councillor Palethorpe to address the committee. Councillor Palethorpe believed that the proposal was out of keeping with area. He added that the application was contrary to Policy E20, in that it did not reflect the character of the area. He reminded the committee that the previous refusal had been upheld by the inspector and that there should a similar refusal for this application.

Councillor Palethorpe left the room for the remainder of the item.

The Chair invited John Marlow, Acting Chair of Billing Parish Council, to address the committee. He asked the committee to note the more than 20 objections and help maintain the character of the area.

The Chair invited Alan Price, who lived adjacent to the proposal site, to address the committee. Mr Price explained that when he had moved to the area he had noted the previous refusal for similar applications. He noted the removal of 7.5m of wall, the potential for his property to be overlooked and the increased risk of flooding due to run off from the new building. He asked that the committee defend the area and refuse the application.

The Chair invited Mr Holman, the applicant, to address the committee. He explained that 25 Penfold Lane had a much larger garden than many in the area. The new proposal was on a smaller scale and fitted well into the site. There had been many changes which would reduce the impact on neighbouring properties. He did not believe this was a precedent, but a sensible use of the site.

In response to questions from the committee Mr Holman supplied the following information:

·         This development would provide a bungalow, a much needed housing type in the area.

The Committee discussed the report.

RESOLVED: That the application be APPROVED subject to the conditions set out in the report.

The vote on the resolution being - For: 4 Against: 4 Abstained: 0

The Chair used his casting vote in favour of the officer advice to support the application.

The Development Management Team Leader outlined the report of the Director of Regeneration, Enterprise and Planning, as set out in the agenda and addendum. The recommendation was for approval in principle of the application to the prior referral of the matter to the Secretary of State; the completion of an appropriate and reasonable Section 106 legal agreement; appropriate conditions and the satisfactory resolution of the matters set out in the report.

The Development Management Team Leader explained that the holding objection from Sport England had been withdrawn.

The Chair invited Councillor Glynane to address the committee. Councillor Glynane declared an interest in that he was Chair of the Northampton flood Defence Alliance. He urged the committee to look at the facts before them. He believed if they did so they would conclude that there was not enough information before them to make a sound decision. The Environment Agency (EA) response, the lack of a transport plan and the future of town centre shopping not being analysed showed the application was premature.

The Chair invited Simon Patnick, on behalf of the applicant, to address the committee. Mr Patnick pointed out the EA request for further consultation if the committee was minded to approve the application. A further flood risk assessment had been submitted since the report was published. He explained this was an outline application to consider the possibility of use and as whole would improve the local area and add to the business and housing uses within the Waterside Enterprise Zone.

In response to questions from the committee the Development Management Team Leader  advised the committee:

• No extension to Tweed Road was proposed
• Relocation of the Civic Amenity Tip was currently being negotiated
• Many of the outstanding issues were already being moved forwards

The Committee discussed the report.

RESOLVED: That the application be APPROVED IN PRINCIPLE, subject to prior referral to the Secretary of State and the issues contained in the report being resolved. A follow up report would be submitted to the Planning Committee likely to be at their next meeting.

The Principal Planning Officer outlined the report of the Director of Regeneration, Enterprise and Planning, as set out in the agenda and addendum. The recommendation was for approval in principle of the application, subject to the completion of an appropriate and reasonable Section 106 legal agreement and the conditions set out in the report.

The Chair invited Councillor Uldall to address the committee. She explained she supported the proposed development on the site, but asked that resident concerns on highways matters be addressed.

The Chair invited Mark Preston, Agent for the applicant, to address the committee. He explained that the traffic survey had shown very few additional traffic movements in the area around school pick up/drop off. The applicant would have a full construction environment management plan in place to ensure the site was developed in a safe manner.

The committee discussed the report.

RESOLVED: That the application be APPROVED IN PRINCIPLE, subject to the completion of an appropriate and reasonable Section 106 legal agreement, the conditions set out in the report and the inclusion of a condition requiring the submission of a scheme for the provision of mains foul sewage on and off site

The Development Management Team Leader outlined the report of the Director of Regeneration, Enterprise and Planning, as set out in the agenda and addendum. The recommendation was for approval subject to the conditions set out in the report and the amended conditions as stated in the addendum.

The committee discussed the report.

RESOLVED: That the application be APPROVED subject to the conditions set out in the report and the addendum.

The Principal Planning Officer outlined the report of the Director of Regeneration, Enterprise and Planning, as set out in the agenda and addendum. The recommendation was for approval subject to the conditions set out in the report.

The committee discussed the report.

RESOLVED: That the application be APPROVED subject to the conditions set out in the report.

The Principal Planning Officer outlined the report of the Director of Regeneration, Enterprise and Planning, as set out in the agenda and addendum. The recommendation was for approval subject to the conditions set out in the report.

In response to a question from the committee the Principal  Planning Officer confirmed:

• That the timescale would be limited by condition for the work to be completed no later than 1^st September 2015.

The committee discussed the report.

RESOLVED: That the application be APPROVED IN PRINCIPLE subject to the conditions set out in the report and the completion of a S106 agreement.

None

The Development Management Team Leader outlined the report of the Director Regeneration, Enterprise and Planning , as set out in the agenda. He advised the Committee that the determination of the application would be made by South Northants District Council (SNDC) and this report would form part of the formal consultation response.

The Committee discussed the report.

RESOLVED: That Northampton Borough Council has no objections to the principle of development subject to the issues outlined in the report by South Northants District Council