Agenda and minutes

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Aziz and Lane.

Copy herewith

The minutes of the meeting held on 17^th December 2015 were agreed and signed by the Chair.

RESOLVED: That under the following items, the members of the public and Councillors listed below were granted leave to address the Committee:

N/2015/1471

Alan Pease

Jan Bolton

Councillor Nunn

Kay Ringwood

Duncan Mills

N/2015/0999 & N/2015/1000

Ian Richardson

Steve Harold

David Brede

Councillor Malpas

Matthew Taylor

N/2015/1067

Mr Fruish

Tracey Dell

Councillor Ansell

Councillor Smith

Ian Abrams

Joe Wooldridge

N/2015/1078

Councillor Stone

N/2015/1256

David Croissant

Councillor Meredith declared a personal, non- pecuniary interest in Item 8a as a County Councillor and member of the Development Control Committee.

Councillor McCutcheon declared a personal, non- pecuniary interest in Item 8a as a County Councillor and member of the Development Control Committee.

Councillor Golby declared a personal, non- pecuniary interest in Item 8a as a County Councillor and Cabinet Member for Learning, Skills and Education.

Councillor Larratt declared a personal, non- pecuniary interest in Item 8a as Chairman of Northamptonshire County Council.

Because it concerned a prior notification application on which the Council has only 28 days to make a decision. That would not provide sufficient time for the application to be considered by the next meeting of the Planning Committee on 16^th February 2016.

The Development Management Team Leader submitted a report on behalf of the Director Regeneration, Enterprise and Planning, and elaborated thereon, that sought approval for a proposed demolition of a redundant care home building using machinery to leave the site in a developable condition.

The Committee discussed the report.

RESOLVED:

1.    That the Authority’s Prior Approval was not required for the method of demolition and proposed restoration of the site for the following reason:

The means of demolition and the proposed restoration of the site are considered to be acceptable and would be consistent with the aims and objectives of policies of the West Northamptonshire Joint Core Strategy and the National Planning Policy Framework.

Report of Director of Regeneration, Enterprise and Planning.

The Development Management Team Leader submitted a List of Current Appeals and Inquiries and elaborated thereon. It was noted that 4 Appeals had been dismissed. He advised that the details of the decision were available on the Borough Council’s website

(Copy herewith)

The Principal Planning Officer elaborated on a report submitted by the Director of Regeneration, Enterprise and Planning. It was explained that the application sought to vary the affordable housing provisions in relation to the disposal of Intermediate Housing Units.

In response to questions asked, the Principal Planning Officer explained that the proposed variation would align the S106 Agreement with more recent changes in Government guidance in relation to the sale of shared ownership properties whilst maintaining control over the disposal of shared ownership units.

RESOLVED:

1.    The Committee AGREED to the variation of affordable housing provisions in the Section 106 agreement dated 21^st February 2011 as set out in the Report.

(Copy herewith)

At this point of the meeting, Councillors Meredith, Golby and McCutcheon left the room having declared an interest in the Item under Item 4 of the agenda.

The Development Management Team Leader submitted a report on behalf of the Director of Regeneration, Enterprise and Planning and elaborated thereon. Member’s attention was drawn to additional information included in the addendum.

Alan Pease, a resident of St Martin’s Lane, spoke against the proposed development.  In response to questions asked, Mr Pease stated that there were no suitable parking alternatives apart from the area adjacent to the water tower which was allocated for staff parking and unsuitable for two-way traffic.

Jan Bolton, as a Hardingstone Parish Councillor, spoke against the proposed development and problems of excess traffic outside school for past 14 years.

Councillor Nunn, as the Ward Councillor, spoke against the proposed development. In response to questions asked, Councillor Nunn confirmed that he had no issue with the proposed extension of the building, but that the possible increased traffic issue was the major concern.

Kaye Ringwood, as the Head of Schools Admissions at Northamptonshire County Council, spoke in favour of the proposed development. Responding to questions asked, she stated that they were still in communication with the Highways Authority and that there had been extensive negotiations with residents. 

Duncan Mills, a representative of MRC Academy Trust, spoke in favour of the proposed development.

The Committee discussed the report.

RESOLVED:

That the Planning Committee of the Borough Council supports the principle of the extension of the school however it is seriously concerned over the impact on the surrounding road network and road safety as a result of the increase in pupil numbers and consequently vehicle movements and on-street car parking. The applicant should work with the Local Highway Authority, the Parish Council and local residents to address these concerns.

The Committee also wished for the County Planning Authority to give consideration to its previous decision on a similar application at Kingsthorpe when determining this matter.

At this point of the meeting Councillors Meredith, Golby and McCutcheon re-joined the Committee.

(Copy herewith)

The Development Management Team Leader submitted a report on behalf of the Director of Regeneration, Enterprise and Planning and elaborated thereon.

The Committee discussed the report.

RESOLVED:

That the application be APPROVED IN PRINCIPLE subject to Standard Advertisement Conditions. As the consultation period was yet to expire, it was AGREED that delegated authority be given to the Director of Regeneration, Enterprise and Planning to assess and resolve any outstanding consultation responses. 

ADDENDUM ATTACHED

(Copy herewith)

The Development Management Team Leader submitted a report on behalf of the Director of Regeneration, Enterprise and Planning and elaborated thereon. It was explained that there were two applications, one being a planning application, the other a listed building application.

Ian Richardson, spoke as a local resident, and spoke against the application expressing concern in particular about parking and highway safety.

Steve Harold, the Managing Director of the business next door, spoke against the application. He stated that had particular concerns regarding scale and nature of the business, parking, vehicle movements and noise from outside.

David Brede, Billing Parish Councillor, spoke against the application on parking and junction issues.

Councillor Malpas, as the Ward Councillor, addressed the Committee and spoke against the application. He advised he was not objecting to the principle but to traffic issues.

Matthew Taylor, spoke on behalf of the applicant and spoke in favour of the application. In response to questions asked, Mr Taylor confirmed that there would be a mixture of Full and Part time staff, some of whom lived in close proximity to the application and therefore would not require parking at the proposed site.

The Committee discussed the report.

RESOLVED:

That both applications be deferred to allow for further consideration of matters involving highway safety.

(Copy herewith)

The Development Management Team Leader submitted a report on behalf of the Director of Regeneration, Enterprise and Planning and elaborated thereon. Members attention was drawn to the addendum and it was noted that a further two letters of representations had been received.

Mr Fruish, a local resident, addressed the Committee and spoke against the application. In response to questions asked, he stated that the parking issues were much greater in the evening.

Tracey Dell, a local resident, addressed the Committee and spoke against the application.

Councillor Ansell, a Ward Councillor for Abington, addressed the Committee and spoke against the application.

Councillor Smith, a Ward Councillor for Abington, addressed the Committee and spoke against the application.

Ian Abrams, the architect, addressed the Committee and spoke in favour of the application.

Joe Wooldridge addressed the Committee and spoke in favour of the application.

RESOLVED:

That the application be REFUSED for the following reason:

There proposed development does not provide any on-site parking facility.  Due to the current existing oversubscribed nature of on-street parking in the area, the proposed development would have a detrimental impact upon highway and pedestrian safety and the amenities of existing residents of the area as the development would result in inappropriate parking and exacerbate the existing problem. The proposal is thereby contrary to Policy S10 of the West Northamptonshire Joint Core Strategy and Policy H6 of the Northampton Local Plan.

(Copy herewith)

The Principal Planning Officer submitted a report on behalf of the Director of Regeneration, Enterprise and Planning and elaborated thereon.

Councillor Stone, as the Ward Councillor, addressed the Committee and spoke against the application.

In response to questions asked the Principal Planning Officer explained that conditions relating to occupancy numbers could be enforced by the Planning Enforcement Team who would examine the landlord’s records and contact the private sector housing team

The Committee discussed the application

RESOLVED:

That the application be REFUSED by reason of the loss of a dwelling that could be occupied as a single small scale family home, the development would fail to ensure the provision of an adequate mixture of house types within the area which fails to comply with the requirements of the National Planning Policy Framework and Policy H5 of the West Northamptonshire Joint Core Strategy.

(Copy herewith)

The Principal Planning Officer submitted a report on behalf of the Director of Regeneration, Enterprise and Planning and elaborated thereon.

David Croissant, as the owner/landlord spoke in favour of the application.

The Committee discussed the application.

RESOLVED:

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

(Copy herewith)

The Chair noted that the item was to be deferred until the next meeting on 16^th February. The Head of Planning advised that the Council had received a further nomination   for listing the property as an asset of community value. This was an important planning consideration, which would affect permitted development rights and the “fallback” position referred to in the officer’s report, relating to the principle of the change of use.

The application was therefore deferred in order to provide an updated report for consideration by Committee, which would assess the change of use in the light of the current situation both with or without permitted development rights.

(Copy herewith)

The Principal Planning Officer submitted a report on behalf of the Director of Regeneration, Enterprise and Planning and elaborated thereon.

The Committee discussed the application.

RESOLVED:

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

None

None

None

None