Agenda and draft minutes

Venue: Council Chamber, Lodge Road, Daventry NN11 4FP

Contact: Marina Watkins / Jeverly Findlay, Democratic Services 

Items
No. Item

46.

Declarations of Interest

Members are asked to declare any interest and the nature of that interest which they may have in any of the items under consideration at this meeting.

 

Minutes:

Councillors Cecile Irving-Swift and Rupert Frost declared an interest in application WND/2021/0391 West Haddonand WND/2021/0867 Barby as friends of the applicant. They advised that they would leave the room during the discussion and voting thereon.

 

The Chair announced that he would be vacating the chair for application WND/2021/0391West Haddon as he had voted in favour of the application when it had been considered at the meeting on 8December 2021 and wanted to avoid any suggestion of pre-determination. Councillor Peter Matten advised that he did not remember how he had voted at the meeting in December but that he had an open mind about the application being considered this evening.

 

Councillor David Smith announced, for transparency, that he was a Cabinet Member as was Councillor Longley who had an interest in application WND/2021/0867 Barby and was the applicant for application WND/2021/0391 West Haddon.

 

47.

Minutes pdf icon PDF 211 KB

To confirm the Minutes of the Meeting of the Committee held on 11th May 2022.

 

Minutes:

RESOLVED:

 

That the Minutes of the Daventry Local Area Planning Committee of 11th May 2022 be approved and signed as a correct record.

 

48.

Planning Application WND/2021/0676 Staverton pdf icon PDF 377 KB

Minutes:

Planning applications

 

Consideration was given to the report detailing the planning applications which had been previously circulated.

 

RESOLVED:

 

That, subject to the variations set out below, the advice set out in the report now submitted be agreed.

 

46.            WND/2021/0676 – STAVERTON - CONSTRUCTION OF DETACHED DWELLING AND GARAGE - LAND AT THE CROFT, CROFT LANE, STAVERTON, NORTHAMPTONSHIRE, NN11 6JE

 

The Area Planning Officer outlined the application and referred to a previous appeal decision for a development proposal on the site which had been dismissed due to the impact on the heritage asset. The current proposal was for a detached dwelling which would be offered as affordable housing. There was a local need for this type of housing and this had been weighed in the balance when considering the application. It had been determined that the public benefit of this provision outweighed the less than substantial harm to the heritage asset. It was however a finely balanced consideration, and it was acknowledged that there would be some harm to the setting of the listed building. With regard to the comments in the late representations, it was highlighted that even if the affordable housing did not meet a proven local need, there was still a widerneed for affordable housing provision.

 

Mr Morgan and Mr Fordham spoke against the application, as they considered that it would harm the heritage asset. Mr Wilbraham, the Agent addressed the Committee and highlighted that the only concerns of a technical nature had been raised by the Conservation Officer.

 

In response to enquiries, the Area Planning Officer advised that generally the structures around a listed building were considered to be within the curtilage and therefore listed also. It was noted that the dwelling would be affordable housing in perpetuity, but legal agreements could be varied at some future date.

 

Councillor Rupert Frost, the local Ward Member, referring to the late representations clarified that the housing survey had been a joint exercise between Daventry District Council and the Parish Council and there was now more up to date information as six new affordable houses were being built in the village.

 

The Council’s Legal Advisor highlighted that it would not be legally sound to refuse the application on the basis of affordable housing not being required. The issue that Members needed to consider was whether the benefit to the community of the provision of an affordable house would outweigh the harm to the heritage asset.

 

Councillor Peter Matten proposed that the application be refused as the public benefit of the provision of one affordable house would not outweigh the harm to the heritage asset. The proposition was seconded by Councillor Jonathan Harris who considered that it was a finely balanced decision. The proposition was put to the meeting and declared carried with 7 voting in favour, 1 against and 1 abstention.

 

RESOLVED:

 

That the application be refused for the following reasons:

 

The Development Plan and material considerations seek to sustain and enhance the historic environment and requires that clear  ...  view the full minutes text for item 48.

49.

Planning Application WND/2021/0753 Clipston pdf icon PDF 361 KB

Minutes:

WND/2021/0753 – CLIPSTON - CONSTRUCTION OF 2 NO, TIMBER CABINS FOR HOLIDAY ACCOMMODATION USE - WOODLAND, LAND OFF OXENDON ROAD, CLIPSTON, NORTHAMPTONSHIRE

 

The Development Management Manager outlined the application and highlighted that the report referred to the lodges accommodating a maximum of two people but it should have stated that were two bedrooms in each lodge, so potentially there could be four people in a lodge at any one time.

 

Mrs Gowling, the applicant, considered that the proposed development would attract trade to the village. In response to enquiries, the applicant and agent advised that the lodges would be built in line with building regulation requirements, and they would built to be ‘eco-friendly’.

 

Councillor Cecile Irving-Swift, the local ward Member, asked for some additional conditions regarding controlling the number of people on the site and retaining the woodland. The Development Management Manager advised that these conditions would not meet the six tests set out in the National Planning Policy Framework.

 

Further to discussion, the Legal Advisor noted that any change of use of the lodges to C3 residential would require a planning application to be submitted.

 

Councillor David James proposed that the application be approved as per Officer’s advice. The proposition was seconded by Councillor Peter Matten and on being put to the meeting was declared carried unanimously.

 

RESOLVED:

 

That the application be approved as set out in the report.

 

50.

Planning Application WND/2021/0867 Barby pdf icon PDF 334 KB

Minutes:

Councillors Cecile Irving-Swift and Rupert Frost, having declared an interest in the following item, left the meeting and took no part in the discussion or voting thereon.

 

WND/2021/0867 – BARBY - RESERVED MATTERS APPLICATION (APPEARANCE, LANDSCAPING, LAYOUT AND SCALE) FOR CONSTRUCTION OF TWO INDUSTRIAL BUILDINGS -LAND AT MANOR WORKS, BARBY LANE, BARBY, NORTHAMPTONSHIRE

 

The Area Planning Officer advised that there was a long-established use of the site for industrial purposes. It would provide local employment and landscaping was proposed to mitigate the development.

 

There were no questions raised by Members.

 

Councillor David James proposed that Officer’s advice to approve the application be accepted. The proposition was seconded by Councillor Peter Matten on being put to the meeting was declared carried unanimously.

 

RESOLVED:

 

That the application be approved as set out in the report.

 

Councillor Cecile Irving-Swift returned to the meeting.

 

51.

Planning Application WND/2021/0905 East Haddon pdf icon PDF 350 KB

Minutes:

WND/2021/0905 – EAST HADDON - DEMOLITION OF EXISTING CONSERVATORY AND CONSTRUCTION OF SINGLE STOREY REAR EXTENSION. CONSTRUCTION OF NEW GARAGE AND CONVERSION OF EXISTING GARAGE TO CAR PORT AND SUN ROOM. ALTERATIONS OF WINDOWS AND DOORS - 6, PRIESTWELL COURT, EAST HADDON, NORTHAMPTONSHIRE

 

The Development Management Manager outlined the application. Some concerns had been raised by neighbours that the proposed grey window frame colour would not be in keeping with the rest of the street, however the street was not in a Conservation Area and therefore it was not considered that this should be a major issue. The proposed changes to the property were considered to be minor with a minimal impact on the street scene as the property was the last property at the far end of the cul-de-sac and the proposed garage to the side of the property was obscured from view by the neighbouring property. Members were advised that two additional letters of support had been received since the publication of the agenda.

 

Councillor Rupert Frost returned to the meeting.

 

Mr Cooper and Mrs Anderson spoke against the application raising concerns about the effect on the street scene and that the garage would have an overbearing effect. Mr Hennessey spoke on behalf of the Parish Council and raised concerns that large vehicles accessing the street had damaged kerbstones in the past.

 

The Chair advised that the local member, Councillor Phil Bignell was not able to attend the meeting and had provided a written representation which was read out to the Committee. Councillor Bignell had no concerns to raise in relation to the extension but was concerned that the garage by virtue of its mass and size would adversely impact the neighbour, overshadowing their garden.

 

Mr Ashby spoke in support of the application and Mrs Dion, the applicant, addressed the Committee. In response to enquiries, it was noted that the roof of the garage had been designed to be flat originally, but the design had been altered to a pitched roof following the receipt of an objection.

 

Further to discussion, the Development Management Manager highlighted that there would be no impact on the Special Landscape Area. If any damage was caused by construction vehicles as a result of the works, this would be a civil matter.

 

Councillor Cecile Irving-Swift proposed that Officer’s advice to approve the application be accepted; this was seconded by Councillor David James and on being put to the meeting was declared carried with 7 voting in favour and 1 abstention.

 

RESOLVED:

 

That the application be approved as set out in the report.

 

52.

Planning Application WND/2021/0391 West Haddon pdf icon PDF 462 KB

Minutes:

Councillors Cecile Irving-Swift, Rupert Frost and Kevin Parker, having declared an interest in the following item, left the meeting and took no part in the discussion or voting thereon.

 

It was proposed by Councillor David Smith and seconded by Councillor Peter Matten that Councillor David James take the Chair for the following item. With the consent of the meeting Councillor David Smith assumed the Chair.

 

WND/2021/0391 – WEST HADDON - CONSTRUCTION OF NEW COTTAGE DWELLING AND A DETACHED GARAGE WITH ASSOCIATED LANDSCAPING (RESUBMISSION OF PREVIOUSLY REFUSED SCHEME UNDER DA/2020/0627) -  LAND ADJ 30, WEST END, WEST HADDON, NORTHAMPTONSHIRE

 

The Area Planning Officer advised that it had been deemed necessary, on the advice of Counsel, to recommend that the previous decision made by the Committee in December to approve the application be rescinded, as it would be likely to be considered unlawful if a claim was made for judicial review.  Officers had engaged with the applicants following the concerns raised regarding the impact of the proposal on the trees covered by a Tree Preservation Order. Revisions had been made to the scheme and a retaining wall added to protect the tree roots and the garage repositioned. The area of open space was recognised as making a significant contribution to the conservation area and the Council had a statutory duty to consider the impact upon it. The harm to the heritage asset was considered to be substantial and outweighed the limited benefit of building a private dwelling. The character and appearance of the open space would fundamentally be changed by the loss of the land and the prominence of the two-storey dwelling and garage.

 

Members were advised that the recommendation needed to be altered slightly to include the word ‘Core’ in reference to the West Northamptonshire ‘Core’ Joint Strategy and the word ‘Conservation’ in the West Haddon Area ‘Conservation’ Appraisal and Management Plan.

 

Mr Humphreys spoke against the application as the site made a positive contribution to the conservation area and the proposed dwelling and garage would cause harm.

 

The Chair advised that the local member, Councillor Phil Bignell was not able to attend the meeting and had provided a written representation which was read out to the Committee. Councillor Bignell considered that the proposed house was sympathetic in design to the neighbouring properties, and that it would provide an enhancement to the village. Currently the stone wall at the boundary of the site was in a poor condition and the application would allow the wall to be rebuilt. Councillor Bignell contended that if the application were refused it would be allowed on appeal.

 

Mr Porter spoke in support of the application and highlighted that the Village Neighbourhood Plan did not include the site as a protected open space.

 

Mr Coy, the Agent, addressed the Committee and noted that the Landscape Officer had considered that the amended scheme addressed the concerns that had been raised regarding the protection of the trees.

 

The Area Planning Officer advised that the Neighbourhood  ...  view the full minutes text for item 52.