Agenda and minutes

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Bottwood, Kilbride and M Markham.

(Copy herewith)

The minutes of the meeting held on 17^th March were agreed by the Committee.

RESOLVED:

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

N/2019/0416

Artur Postiliuk

Helen Town

Laura Elliott

N/2019/0417

Gemma Dudley

Helen Town

Laura Elliott

N/2019/0941

Andrew Gray

Sue Tooke Mangion-Cavarra

Helen Town

Laura Elliott

N/2020/0123

Jonathan Evans

None.

None.

The Development Manager submitted a List of Current Appeals and Inquiries on behalf of the Director of Planning and Sustainability. She explained that 11 appeals were pending but no decisions had been reached at the time.

Members discussed the report.

RESOLVED:

That the report be noted.

None

None.

(None)

None.

(None)

None.

(None)

None.

(None)

None.

The Principal Planning Officer submitted a report to the Committee. Members’ attention was drawn to the addendum which contained an additional objection letter signed by 12 occupants of the application property. The application sought approval for the construction of an additional storey to create 10 new flats, cycle storage and 2 new bays to the existing bin store. The application had been amended since its submission to reduce the size of the extension and number of flats from 17 to 10. No additional parking was proposed.

Artur Postoliuk, a local resident, spoke against the application and commented that existing sewage issues would be exacerbated, the proposal may overlook other properties, structure of building may not be able to accommodate another floor, residents are against proposals, and the development would be overcrowded increasing the likelihood of crime in an unsafe area. Mr Postoliuk believed that the town should be growing on the outskirts not on top of existing buildings.

Helen Town, Assistant Director of Northampton Partnership Homes (NPH), spoke in favour of the application and commented that NPH are having a big push on building because there are currently 3,852 people on the Council’s housing register, over a third of those qualifying for emergency housing. She advised that there were approximately 100 bids on 1 and 2 bedroom properties and a particular demand for town centre housing, with huge demand for housing manifesting itself in rough sleeping and overcrowding. 

In response to questions, Ms Town explained that the flats were accessed using fobs and the number of existing CCTV cameras would be reviewed and increased. She advised that NPH have reviewed the car park barriers on site and that all residents had been contacted regarding the proposal and offered face-to-face meetings, being mindful of residents’ individual needs around construction and design.

Laura Elliott, NPH, spoke in favour of the application and commented that the proposal would bolster the Council’s existing housing stock. The proposal would use a similar lightweight steel structure system to that utilised for the Centenary House project.  She noted that the proposal was part of £1.6m investment in the last 4 years.

In response to questions, the Committee heard that drainage had been reviewed and the building had capacity for the proposed developments, however NPH would be willing to have this reviewed again.

Councillor Golby left the meeting at 17:35

The Principal Planning Officer confirmed that details relating to air quality and ventilation would be controlled by a condition for the proposed additional storey, but that under planning such details could not be required for the lower floors.

Members discussed the report.

RESOLVED:

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

Councillor Golby re-joined the meeting at this juncture.

The Principal Planning Officer submitted a report to the Committee. Members’ attention was drawn to the addendum which contained two additional letters of objection from local residents. The application sought approval for the construction of an additional storey to the existing block of flats to create 10 new flats, a new cycle store and 2 additional bays to the bin store. The proposed new floor would be set in from the existing building and covered in grey cladding. Conditions were included in the report that required revised cycle storage details prior to any occupation of the proposed development. No additional parking was proposed.

Gemma Dudley, a local business employee, spoke against the application and commented that there was hugely inadequate level of parking provision at Woodstock and that unlawful on-street parking practices were common in the area due to a lack of spaces at the application property; the development would exacerbate parking problems. Common for occupiers of Woodstock to park on shared access road with neighbouring business and obstruct access; also instances of unauthorised parking in car park for business.  She advised that parking restrictions in the area were not enforced and sought a condition to secure a travel plan officer to discourage unauthorised parking by residents.  Access to the site from the Billing Road is difficult and unsafe; development would add to difficulties with access, particularly during the construction phase.  Ms Dudley commented that local residents and businesses would suffer a loss of amenity from the proposal, including outlook and light, and that the scale and density of development would not be consistent with character of area.

Helen Town, NPH, spoke in favour of the application and explained that there are currently 3,852 people on the Council’s housing register with a high demand for 1 and 2 bed properties in the town. She acknowledged a parking issue around the status of the shared access road and advised that NPH are in discussions with the Local Highway Authority regarding a Traffic Regulation Order (TRO) to seek to resolve the issue.  Ms Town advised that residents declare their registration numbers for a fob which has enabled NPH to find out that a lot of people parking on shared access road are not residents; parking issues is not about parking overflow from Woodstock residents and is a separate issue relating to yellow lines.  She also advised that a car park barrier was introduced on the site because residents complained about non-residents using car park. NPH has typically found that since introduced fobs and car park barriers into car parks across the town centre that this has made the parking situation better for residents; on the whole NPH has enough spaces for people that have cars in the town centre.

Laura Elliott, NPH, spoke in favour of the application and explained that the proposal would utilise a lightweight steel structure system largely fabricated offsite to minimise impacts and that NPH would also work with  ...  view the full minutes text for item 12b

The Principal Planning Officer submitted a report to the Committee. Members’ attention was drawn to the addendum which contained an amended Condition 2 and additional neighbour objections. She advised that should the application be approved by the Committee, an additional condition would be included in respect of lighting. The application had been amended since its submission to reduce the height of the proposed development and improve occupants’ living conditions, the proposed development’s relationship with neighbouring properties and the removal of parking spaces to overcome Highways objections.

Andrew Gray, on behalf of local residents, spoke against the application and commented that the proposal did not meet the Council’s own parking standards, nor did the separation distance between the proposed development and existing properties meet the minimum requirement of 21m. Mr Gray stated that the benefits of the proposal did not outweigh the harm that it would cause.

Sue Tooke Mangion-Cavarra, a local resident, spoke against the application and voiced concern around the lack of proposed parking, privacy and security issues and access for disabled residents. Mrs Tooke Mangion-Cavarra advised that emergency service vehicles sometimes had trouble accessing the building due to bad parking practices; the proposal would exacerbate this problem.

Laura Elliott, NPH, spoke in favour of the application and commented that the application included changes made based on extensive consultation with residents and the Council’s Planning Officer and NCC Highways Officer; materials used and the rotation of proposed buildings were now in-keeping with existing buildings on Blackthorn.

Responding to questions, Ms Elliott advised that the access to the proposed dwellings would be level at the ground floor, designed specifically for wheelchair users. She further advised that there was no existing disabled parking provision; this had been included at the request of residents.

The Principal Planning Officer confirmed that the Local Highway Authority was happy with the proposal, in respect of emergency access and parking. It was also advised that the northern boundary was unchanged as a result of this proposal and a tree was being retained in response to Tree Officer comments. Following a question she advised that solar panelling was not proposed as part of the development.

Members discussed the report.

RESOLVED:

That the application be APPROVED subject to the conditions and reasons as set out in the report and amended Condition 2 in the addendum with additional Condition 12 in relation to lighting.

Councillor Cali left the meeting at this juncture.

The Development Manager submitted a report to the Committee and explained that the proposal would benefit occupants of the flats; 2 parking spaces would be removed to allow the development to take place and it was noted that there were no statutory objections to the application.

Members discussed the report.

RESOLVED:

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

The Development Manager submitted a report to the Committee and explained that the proposal would benefit occupants of the flats; the installation would not adversely affect neighbour amenity and it was noted that there were no statutory objections to the application.

Members discussed the report.

RESOLVED:

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

The Development Management Team Leader submitted a report to the Committee. Members heard that the application sought approval for the demolition of an outbuilding to create a side extension, new vehicular access and dropped kerb. The nearby tree would be retained as part of the application.

Jonathan Evans, NPH, spoke in favour of the application and advised that the proposed development would benefit the current occupier of the property who was disabled.

Members discussed the report.

RESOLVED:

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

The Development Management Team Leader submitted a report to the Committee. The application sought approval for a change of use from Community Room to Dwelinghouse. It was explained that the site was underused and another community centre was located nearby. An additional condition relating to details of boundary treatment was recommended by officers.

Members discussed the report.

RESOLVED:

That the application be APPROVED subject to the conditions and reasons as set out in the report and an additional condition to agree details of boundary treatments.

The Principal Planning Officer submitted a report to the Committee and explained that the proposed development would be constructed using the same materials as the existing property and that the garage was proposed to be converted into a bedroom, however the number of bedrooms in the property would remain unchanged. Two additional windows, matching those existing, would be added in place of the garage door.

Members discussed the report.

RESOLVED:

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