Agenda and minutes

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Cali, Haque, Kilbride, M Markham and Russell.

(Copy herewith).

The minutes of the meeting held on 18^th February 2020 were agreed and signed by the Chair.

RESOLVED:

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

N/2018/1645

Catrina Cruickshank

David Corley

N/2019/1402

Joanna Pole

Pat Dooley

N/2019/1604

Councillor Smith

N/2020/0006

Mike Hallam

N/2019/0202

Sarah Holtham

Gary Owens

Councillor Oldham declared a personal interest in respect of item 10b as the Ward Councillor but advised of no predetermination.

Councillor Lane declared a personal interest in respect of item 10f as a friend of the applicant and advised that he would leave the room whilst the item was discussed.

Councillor Bottwood declared a disclosable and pecuniary interest in respect of items 12a and 12b as a board member of Northampton Partnership Homes (NPH) and advised that he would leave the room whilst these items were discussed.

None.

The Development Manager submitted a List of Current Appeals and Inquiries on behalf of the Director of Planning and Sustainability. She advised that 2 decisions had been reached in respect of the same property. The refusals had been made under delegated powers. The first appeal was dismissed by the Inspector who agreed with officers that the external finish would not be in-keeping with surrounding properties. A second application was refused by officers who had concerns around the partial cladding of the proposed dormer; however, the inspector disagreed and found the proposal acceptable with hanging tiles to the side gable.

Councillors suggested that photos to show the key issues would be helpful for future appeal decisions.

RESOLVED:

That the report be noted.

At this juncture Councillor Golby joined the meeting and advised of no declarations of interest.

None.

None.

None.

(Addendum attached)

The Development Management Team Leader submitted a report to the Committee. Members’ attention was drawn to the addendum which contained representations from the NBC Arboricultural Officer, additional Condition 7 and additional 3^rd party comments. The Committee were informed that the application proposed the conversion of the existing dwelling house to create 2 apartments and extension to create  2 new apartments. 4 parking spaces were proposed to the rear of the development and garden areas would be provided for the ground floor apartments which would be used for refuse and cycle storage. No windows were proposed for the first-floor side elevations to ensure neighbour privacy; ground-floor side windows would be hidden by boundary treatment. It was explained that the property had existing planning permission, granted in 2018, for the construction of a 2-bed semi-detached dwelling plus alterations to the existing property.

Joanna Pole, of a neighbouring property, spoke against the application and voiced concerns around the loss of green space in the area and the likely increase in traffic. She advised that the area currently suffered from a lack of parking and noted that the proposal did not include visitor parking.

Pat Dooley, the agent on behalf of the applicant, spoke in favour of the application and commented that the proposed development sat on the same footprint as the development for which there was existing planning permission, which was supported by the Council. He suggested that the neighbours were possibly not aware of the existing planning permission. Mr Dooley advised that there was sufficient parking provision.

Members discussed the report.

RESOLVED:

That the application be APPROVED subject to the conditions and reasons as set out in the report and additional Condition 7 contained in the addendum in relation to boundary treatments.

The Development Management Team Leader submitted a report to the Committee. Members’ attention was drawn to the addendum which contained additional 3^rd party comments and an additional Condition 25. The Committee were informed that previous planning permission for 7 townhouses on the site had expired. The proposed development, which has been amended during the course of the application, comprised the demolition of existing buildings and construction of new buildings to provide 23 apartments and 8 townhouses. Vehicular access would be via gated access from Derngate to a rear parking area providing 8 spaces. Refuse and cycle storage would be provided within enclosed stores on the ground floor of the main building fronting Derngate. It was noted that there had been no statutory objections to the scheme. A condition was included to agree specific details of building materials and window details to ensure a good standard of development. A condition was included to ensure a scheme for electric vehicle charging points within the site in accordance with the Council’s Parking SPD. A condition was also included to ensure full details of the surface drainage scheme for the site be submitted before any ground works commence. The scheme had been independently assessed on behalf of the Council and concluded that the development would be unviable if any affordable housing or S106 contributions were provided.

Catrina Cruikshank, a local resident, spoke against the application and commented that several residents had not been consulted on the scheme. She stated that the development was inappropriate for the area, it would cause massive disruption and block Bedford Road.

David Corley, the applicant, spoke in favour of the application and commented that the scheme had been reduced in co-operation with planning officers; he stated that the development would be subject to CIL payments of £50,000 in respect of the proposed new build elements and advised that there would be no need to close Derngate.

In response to questions, the Committee heard that the Council had an obligation to display notices near the site or send letters to neighbours; notices were duly displayed near the site and a number of letters sent to surrounding occupiers. They further heard that in respect of the close proximity of the 2 proposed buildings, a condition was included to ensure that certain windows be obscure glazed to mitigate any overlooking issues. Conditions 19 and 20 related to construction works and Environmental Health legislation could be used to enforce any issues in respect of excessive noise.

The Director of Planning and Sustainability explained that long-term discussions had been had with regard to the development’s design.

Members discussed the report.

RESOLVED:

That the application be APPROVED subject to the conditions and reasons as set out in the report and additional Condition 25 contained in the addendum in relation to protection of bats.

The Principal Planning Officer submitted a report to the Committee. Members’ attention was drawn to the addendum which contained amended Conditions 2, 5 and 7 and 3 additional conditions that superseded Condition 8. The proposed development would comprise 100% affordable housing. Access would be from a new junction on the Dayrell Road roundabout. The multi-use games area would be retained and upgraded, and areas of green space retained to the north and south of the site. A surface water drainage attenuation pond would be created in the northeast end of the site. 2 parking spaces per dwelling would be provided, as well as 1 EV charging point per property.

In response to questions, the Committee were informed that the nearby school had arrangements in place around parents collecting children; the proposed roundabout alterations would improve the situation. It was noted that there had been no requests by the Police or the school to impose speed restrictions on the road.

Members discussed the report.

RESOLVED:

That the application be APPROVED IN PRINCIPLE subject to the completion of a S106 agreement and conditions and reasons as set out in the report and amended Conditions 2, 5 and 7, with  3 additional conditions and superseding Condition 8 in relation to drainage matters, contained in the addendum.

At this juncture, Councillor Lane left the room.

The Development Manager submitted a report to the Committee and explained that the application sought approval for the construction of a small side extension which would house a post office with refuse storage to the rear. Materials used would match existing and details of security (CCTV) were secured by way of a condition. It was noted that there had been no objections from statutory consultees.

Members discussed the report.

RESOLVED:

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

Councillor Lane re-joined the meeting.

The Principal Planning Officer submitted a report to the Committee. The application sought approval for a change of use from dwellinghouse to HIMO for 7 occupants. Alterations were also proposed, including a rooflight and rear dormer window. The rear conservatory would be demolished, and a permanent lean-to structure constructed. It was noted that Private Sector Housing had not objected to the principle of a basement kitchen. All bedrooms would be equipped with en-suite facilities. The Local Highway Authority had requested a parking beat survey, however the applicant declined to carry one out due to the proximity of public transport links and shopping facilities.

Councillor Smith spoke against the application and commented that the predominance of HIMOs contributed to the parking problems in the area and advised that the application represented significant overdevelopment and would exacerbate problems associated with HIMOs.

In response to a question, Councillor Smith advised that refuse, which would be kept in the garden prior to collections, would be carried through the living room, out of the front door and down an alleyway to the garden, which she believed to be impractical.

Members discussed the report.

RESOLVED:

That the application be REFUSED against the officer recommendation on highway safety/parking grounds and amenity issues relating to basement kitchen and refuse disposal.  The final wording of the reasons for refusal would be delegated to the Director of Planning and Sustainability in consultation with the Chair.

At this juncture Councillors Birch and Lane left the room.

Councillor Golby explained that the applicant was a colleague but advised of no predetermination.

The Development Manager submitted a report to the Committee. She explained that the application was deferred from the previous Planning Committee in order for the applicant to work with planning officers to come up with a more appropriate scheme. The revised application featured a top hung window which would be obscurely glazed up to 1.7m and a second rooflight and a side window removed. Neighbouring properties had been re-consulted on the revised plans and no objections had been received.

Mike Hallam, the applicant, spoke in favour of the application and commented that the Members’ concern regarding overlooking had now been addressed and thanked planning officers for their assistance in making the application compliant.

Members discussed the report.

RESOLVED:

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

At this juncture, Councillor Lane re-joined the meeting.

The Development Manager submitted a report to the Committee. Members’ attention was drawn to the addendum which contained amended conditions 4 and 7. The application sought to vary the ground levels of plots 1 to 6; access to these properties would also be amended from level entry to steps. Level access would remain at ground level from the rear of those properties.

Members discussed the report.

RESOLVED:

That the application be APPROVED subject to the conditions and reasons as set out in the report and amended Conditions 4 and 7 contained in the addendum.

The Development Management Team Leader submitted a report to the Committee and explained that the site was part of the Northampton North SUE allocation. As part of the development, a new section of A43 dual carriageway was proposed and new roundabout to allow access to the site. Existing farm buildings would be retained and converted to community buildings and footpaths running through the site would be retained. Conditions had been included following consultation with Environmental Health in respect of air quality mitigation measures. It was explained that the site may be subject to a viability assessment, but this would be for Daventry District Council to determine. It was further explained that the Council were looking for S106 financial contributions for off-site sports provision.

In response to questions it was explained that the application formed part of the larger Overstone Leys development. The Committee further heard that the properties would contribute towards NBC’s housing supply. With regard to emissions, it was explained that Condition 8 related to proposed EV charging points throughout the site. The Director of Planning and Sustainability confirmed that DDC would need to be mindful of their ambitions regarding the current climate emergency.

Members discussed the report.

RESOLVED:

That Northampton Borough Council RAISE NO OBJECTION to the application and with the officer recommendation to be amended at 1.1 to include Environmental Health comments at 8.17 of the committee report to elaborate on requirements for the Low Emissions Strategy, and to “request” the allocation of S106 funding for off-site sports provision.

At this juncture, Councillor Bottwood left the committee meeting, having declared an interest earlier.

The Principal Planning Officer submitted a report to the Committee. Members’ attention was drawn to the addendum which contained comments from the Northamptonshire Police Crime Prevention Officer. As part of the development, the garages would be demolished, and 2 new dwellings constructed. 1 existing tree would be retained and 2 removed and replaced, along with further planting.

Sarah Holtham, a local resident, spoke against the application and commented that there were many problems in the area including vandalism of property and fly-tipping and believed it to be due to overdevelopment in the area. She stated that it was irresponsible of the Council to remove much-used garages.

Gary Owens, Construction Manager for NPH, spoke in favour of the application and commented that 5 of the 6 tenants of occupied garages had been relocated and advised that garden space was more appropriate than parking in this instance, and housing a more urgent priority than parking.

In response to a question, Mr Owens confirmed that the farthest relocated garage was 75m from the application site.

Members discussed the report.

RESOLVED:

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

The Principal Planning Officer submitted a report to the Committee. Members’ attention was drawn to the addendum which contained comments from the Northamptonshire Police Crime Prevention Officer. The Committee heard that the development would be accessed from Hogswood Road, the small nearby park would be retained, and 12 parking spaces would be provided. The properties would have a modern design and all feature rear gardens.

Members discussed the report.

RESOLVED:

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