Agenda and minutes

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Bottwood, Choudary, Golby, Kilbride and Kilby-Shaw.

(Copy to follow)

The minutes of the meeting held on 19^th March 2019 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/2019/0295

Ashley Lane

N/2019/0200

Toby Birch

Councillor Hill

N/2018/0848

Councillor Hill

N/2018/1404

Chris Parr

N/2018/1544

Councillor Stone

N/2018/1743

Councillor Davenport

Veronica Smith

N/2019/0117

Chris Parr

N/2019/0118

Chris Parr

N/2019/0176

Kevin Harrison

Chris Parr

N/2019/0181

Chris Parr

N/2019/0203

Chris Parr

N/2019/0250

Chris Parr

Councillor Markham declared a personal and disclosable pecuniary interest in respect of items 10b, 10f, 10g, 10h, 10i, 10j, 10k and 10l as a board member of Northampton Partnership Homes (NPH) and advised that she would leave the room whilst the item was discussed.

Councillor Birch declared a personal and disclosable pecuniary interest in respect of item 9a as a board member of Community Spaces Northampton and advised that she would leave the room whilst the item was discussed.

Councillor Smith declared a predetermination in respect of item 10e and advised that she would leave the room whilst the item was discussed.

There were none.

The Development Manager submitted a List of Current Appeals and Inquiries on behalf of the Head of Planning and elaborated thereon. She reported that 6 decisions had been reached. Of note were 2 appeals relating to 94 St Leonards Road and 61 Purser Road that were allowed by the Inspector. Regarding the former, it was explained that the Inspector found that the property sat in a sustainable location and assessed the additional bedroom as not having an adverse impact on neighbour amenity. Additionally, the Inspector found that the window would cause “some” overlooking but no significant harm. With regard to 61 Purser Road, the Inspector found that it was unlikely that all occupants of the property would be car owners, and that the property sat in a sustainable location.

In response to a question, the Development Manager explained that similar applications may have different officer recommendations due to recent decisions in an area.              

RESOLVED:

That the report be noted.

The Principal Planning Officer submitted a report and elaborated thereon. Members’ attention was drawn to the addendum which amended the officer recommendation. The Committee heard that the application sought to vary the tenure of affordable housing to make the site more viable to developers. It was explained that properties rented out under the Rentplus model would be allocated via the Council’s housing register and occupants would have the opportunity to purchase their property every 5 years.

Ashley Lane, representing the applicant, spoke in favour of the application and commented that the site had been cleared in preparation for development and should the Committee approve the application, it was estimated that the 50 affordable homes would be completed by November 2020.

In response to a question, Mr Lane confirmed that it was the intention of the applicant to deliver all of the affordable homes, however developers preferred consolidated groups of affordable housing since they were easier to manage.

Members discussed the report.

RESOLVED:

The Committee AGREED to vary the Section 106 Agreement in accordance with the amended recommendation  in the addendum.

There were none.

At this juncture Councillor Birch left the room, having declared an interest in the following item.

The Development Manager submitted a report and elaborated thereon. Members heard that the application sought to provide a new hall with improved kitchen and toilet facilities, and a new play area in the courtyard. The extension would be single-storey with a pitched roof, facing away from residential properties. The scale and design of the proposed development were considered in-keeping with the surrounding area. There would be additional fincing around the courtyard to improve security of the site.

Toby Birch, Chair of Rectory Farm Residents’ Association and a member of Community Spaces, spoke in favour of the application and thanked Northampton Borough Council officers for their support in respect of the application. He explained that a number of alternative plans had been considered and following consultation, the application presented to Members had received the most support.

Councillor Hill, in his capacity as the Ward Councillor for Rectory Farm, spoke in favour of the application and commented that the application was a good example of joined-up working and stated that many different groups of people would benefit from the development.

Members discussed the report.

RESOLVED:

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

Councillor Birch re-joined the meeting at this juncture.

The Development Manager submitted a report and elaborated thereon. The Committee heard that graphics on the hoarding had been removed; the application sought approval for new advertisment on the existing hoarding on site.

In response to a question, it was explained that the Assets Department would have the final say on advertising content.

Members discussed the report.

RESOLVED:

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

(Copy of addendum herewith)

The Principal Planning Officer submitted a report and elaborated thereon. Members’ attention was drawn to the addendum; the plans had been revised following representations from the Highway Authority. Following receipt of additional information and consultation responses from the Lead Local Flood Authority, several conditions were amended and several added for recommendation. It was further explained that the Highway Authority had not commented on the revised plans so it would request that the Head of Planning be given delegated authority to consider any responses from the Highway Authority and to secure amendments to the scheme, or impose additional conditions as may be appropriate. The Committee heard that access to the site would be to the north on Blackthorn Way, drainage and public open space would be located to the south of the site. A financial contribution towards primary education would be secured through the Section 106 Agreement and 35% of housing on site would be affordable.

Councillor Hill, in his capacity as the Ward Councillor for Rectory Farm, spoke in favour of the application and expressed his pleasure that the level of affordable housing would be maintained at 35% and noted that the number of objections to the application had been low.

In response to questions, Members heard that there were provisions in place to ensure the development’s open spaces were looked after, and that street lighting would be dealt with as part of the adoption of the roads. It was explained that the Planning Department would be liaising with Housing Strategy, to identify local housing needs when negotiating the tenure of affordable housing.

Members discussed the report.

RESOLVED:

That the application be APPROVED IN PRINCIPLE subject to a Section 106 Agreement to secure planning obligations, with revised and amended Conditions 19, 21, 22 and 23 contained in the addendum, with delegated authority to the Head of Planning to consider responses from the Local Highway Authority and impose planning conditions as appropriate.

The Principal Planning Officer submitted a report and elaborated thereon. Members’ attention was drawn to the addendum which contained additional representations. The Committee were informed that should the application be approved, the concentration of HIMO properties in a 50m radius would be 6.3%. Due to the close proximity of transport links and shops, the site was considered sustainable and Members noted that there were no objections from the Local Highway Authority or Private Sector Housing.

Councillor Stone, in her capacity as a Ward Councillor for Castle, spoke against the application and asked the Committee to defer the application until Committee Members could visit the property. She suggested that consultees should include the Police in high-density areas. Councillor Stone further suggested that by converting the attic and basement, they were being made available to turn into bedrooms at a later date.

The Chair explained that site visits were not a mandatory requirement.

The Principal Planning Officer explained to Members that Building Control had jurisdiction over fire exits and that cooking facilities within the property were not a planning consideration.

Members discussed the report.

RESOLVED:

That the application be REFUSED against the officer recommendation on poor layout and providing poor amenity for future occupants. The final wording of the refusals to be drafted by officers in consultation with the Chair.

The Principal Planning Officer submitted a report and elaborated thereon. Members’ attention was drawn to the addendum which contained additional objections from local residents and an additional Condition. The Committee heard that the site was considered sustainable, being located close to transport links and shops. It was noted that planning permission had been agreed in 2006 for conversion of the property into 3 flats but had since expired.

Councillor Davenport, in her capacity as a Ward Councillor for Delapre & Briar Hill, spoke against the application and advised that an inspector report completed in 2005 had shown that any development on the site would result in “significant overlooking” – she stated that fencing would not alleviate this problem. She highlighted the area’s parking issues and explained that people did not get the bus simply because they lived near a bus stop.

Veronica Smith, resident of a neighbouring property, spoke against the application and stated that should the application be approved, she would have no privacy in her garden and that her quality of life would be severely impacted. She invited Members to view the site from her property to get a better understanding of what she would be living with.

In response to a question around existing overlooking from the main dwelling, Mrs Smith explained that she “hid” behind her shed when spending time in her garden; she would not be able to hide from the new flats.

The Principal Planning Officer explained that the new outbuilding windows were significantly smaller than those existing. She further explained that fixed glazed windows in the bedrooms would create poor living conditions for occupants and so were considered unacceptable.

Members discussed the report.

RESOLVED:

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

At this juncture Councillor Smith left the room, having declared a predetermination.

The Principal Planning Officer submitted a report and elaborated thereon. Members’ attention was drawn to the addendum which contained comments from Environmental Health. The Committee heard that there were no external alterations proposed as part of the application and that the site sat in what was considered a sustainable location. It was noted that the Local Highway Authority had raised no 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.

At this juncture Councillors Meredith and Markham left the room, and Councillor Smith re-joined the meeting.

The Principal Planning Officer submitted a report and elaborated thereon. It was explained that following demolition of 8 garages, 2 2-bedroom maisonettes would be constructed, with the provision of 4 parking spaces.

Kevin Harrison, a local resident, spoke against the application and stated that whilst he recognised the need for housing, there were inaccuracies in the design and access statement. He commented that the applicant had not engaged with residents and there had been no opportunity for feedback. Mr Harrison highlighted parking problems in the area and noted that emergency service vehicles struggled to access Orchard Close on occasion.

Chris Parr, Major Works Manager at Northampton Partnership Homes (NPH), spoke in favour of the application and confirmed that 44 properties were consulted. Of those, 13 gave online feedback. 3 responses were positive, whilst 10 had concerns around parking and construction. Mr Parr noted that 5 of the garages were currently occupied and that most had been offered alternative garages nearby. He further noted that there was very high demand for housing in Wootton, with 172 bids for properties most recently.

In response to questions, Mr Parr commented that he had not recently seen the design and access statement but would be happy to look into any discrepancies. He gave his assurance that consultation letters had duly gone out to local residents but would investigate and deal with any issues that may arise.

Members discussed the report.

RESOLVED:

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

Councillor Meredith re-joined the meeting at this juncture.

The Development Manager submitted a report and elaborated thereon. Members’ attention was drawn to the addendum which contained further representations from the Police and the Local Highway Authority. The Committee heard that installation of the proposed barrier would result in better security for residents.

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 and elaborated thereon. The Committee heard that dated cladding would be replaced, the replacement windows would improve visual amenity and waste storage would be more central to the flats.

In response to a question, it was explained that bin stores had successfully been trialled in another part of the town.

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 and elaborated thereon. The Committee heard that dated cladding would be replaced, the replacement windows would improve visual amenity and waste storage would be more central to the flats.

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 and elaborated thereon. The Committee heard that dated cladding would be replaced, the replacement windows would improve visual amenity and waste storage would be more central to the flats.

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 and elaborated thereon. The Committee heard that dated cladding would be replaced, the replacement windows would improve visual amenity and waste storage would be more central to the flats.

In response to a question, Chris Parr, Major Works Manager for NPH confirmed that the company would be looking to improve pathways as part of their next project.

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 and elaborated thereon. Members’ attention was drawn to the addendum which contained 2 amended conditions and notification of a revised plan showing additional trees to be retained.

In response to a question, the Principal Planning Officer confirmed that access from the properties to parking spaces would remain open.

Members discussed the report.

RESOLVED:

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

The Development Manager submitted a report and elaborated thereon. The Committee heard that planning permission for the temporary structure had been approved in November 2016; this application sought approval for a further 2 years.

Members discussed the report.

RESOLVED:

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

None.

None.