Agenda, decisions and minutes

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.

None advised.

To confirm the Minutes of the Meeting of the Committee held on 7 June 2023.

The minutes of the meeting held on 7^th June 2023 would be brought to the next meeting.

To receive communications from the Chair.

The Chair advised that due to the high number of speakers registered under item 7d, this item would be considered first.

None.

None.

Refused due to impact on Conservation Area, parking, and conflict with Council’s HMO Policies

The Senior Planning Officer presented the report which sought approval for the conversion of a dwellinghouse to 5 person HMO and single-storey rear extension. Members’ attention was drawn to the addendum which contained an amended Condition 4. It was noted that the original submission was for an 8 person HMO, however following negotiations with the applicant, the number was reduced. 90 letters of objection had been received in respect of the application, and there were no objections from statutory consultees. Should the application be approved, the concentration of HMOs in a 50m radius would be 8.3%.

Belinda Kelly, a local resident, addressed the Committee and spoke against the application. She stated that as a heritage asset within a conservation area that the property should be retained and referenced paragraph 189 of the National Planning Policy Framework. She did not feel that the extension and conversion of the property was acceptable and stated that in relation to parking, the Council’s HMO SPD had been dispensed in favour of anecdotal evidence. She also felt that no consideration had been given to the Billing Road Conservation Area.

In response to questions, the Development Manager confirmed that plans, photographs and other materials/documents could not be circulated at committee but could be submitted as part of the existing consultation arrangements.

Councillor Z Smith, in her capacity as a Ward Councillor for Abington and Phippsville, addressed the Committee and spoke against the application. She asked the Committee to consider that the Planning Inspector had previously upheld Committee refusals on Conservation Area grounds and voiced concern around the impact on highways and residential amenity, and the issues associated with transient populations.

The Development Manager noted that the Planning Inspector had overturned 3 Committee refusals on parking grounds in recent months.

Councillor Purser, in his capacity as a Ward Councillor for Abington and Phippsville, addressed the Committee and spoke against the application. He highlighted the significant levels of concern the proposal was having on local residents and the proposal’s impact on the Conservation Area. He also noted the referral of the property to Planning Enforcement and questioned whether the Committee should be making a decision where enforcement was taking place. Councillor Purser also pointed out that the property would not be providing sufficient parking as described in the Council’s HMO SPD.

In response to a question, Councillor Purser stated that parking issues were exacerbated in this instance due to the proximity of the nearby hospital and school.

The Development Manager confirmed that enforcement was in relation to pointing of the property; the investigation would continue regardless of the outcome of this application.

Matt Collerson, the agent on behalf of the applicant, addressed the Committee and spoke in favour of the application. He commented that the property would be finished to a high quality and well managed, and likely to be lived in by healthcare professionals. He noted that the concentration of HMOs would be under the Council’s 10% threshold if the application was approved, and that the application  ...  view the full minutes text for item 7.

Approved, subject to conditions

The Principal Planning Officer presented the report which sought approval of a reserved matters application for the construction of 68 dwellings, associated access routes, landscaping, open space and drainage. Members’ attention was drawn to the addendum which contained revisions to plan numbers in Condition 1.

Frances Keenan, the agent on behalf of the applicant, addressed the Committee and spoke in favour of the application. She commented that 27 of the proposed properties would be affordable. The application followed established parameters regarding land use, movement, building height and green infrastructure, which were established through the 2021 outline consent. Layout and detailed design elements accorded with the design code which was approved by the Strategic Planning Committee in July 2022. Resident parking was planned in a series of formal parking courts concealed from the spine road and planned to receive maximum surveillance, and the layout of properties was designed to ensure the privacy of future occupants. The properties would all be built to national space standards and provided the legally required level of accessible, adaptable and wheelchair user accommodation, and meet the required higher water efficiency of 110 litres per person per day. All houses would be highly efficient and in excess of the 2022 Regulations, and EV charging points fitted at the time of completion. Objections received during the consultation phase had been addressed through revisions to the design, including the objections from Highways.

In response to questions, the Committee heard that the bricks used throughout the development would be similar to those previously used; they had been approved by the case officer. Insulation levels and solar efficiency fell under the remit of Building Regulations. The levels of affordable accommodation were 25% across the entire site and 40% across the application site, phase b1. The Committee also heard in relation to paragraph 7.13 of the report, due to the design of the proposal, deviation of the design code had been agreed by Highways in this instance only.

Members discussed the report.

Councillor Hill proposed and Councillor Irving-Swift seconded that the officer recommendation be agreed. The recommendation was put to a vote and declared carried with 7 votes for and 1 against.

RESOLVED:

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

Approved, subject to conditions

The Principal Planning Officer presented the report which sought approval for a change of use of existing land for the construction of a single dwelling, including the demolition of existing commercial buildings. This was a resubmission of a previously withdrawn application to address concerns raised by consultees.

Andy Lord, the agent on behalf of the applicant, addressed the Committee and spoke in favour of the application. He noted that there were no objections from Heritage, Highways, or Ecology officers. The proposal presented the opportunity to remove an incongruous but lawful commercial use in the open countryside which was visually harmful with a single dwelling of a similar footprint to the existing building. Mr Lord further noted that concerns from Brington Parish Council had been addressed in the report and stated that regarding future development, ultimate protection lay with WNC, as noted by the Heritage Officer in the report.

In response to questions, the Committee heard that the original application was for a larger dwelling with more overt detailing; the scale had been reduced along with the ridge height, and a 3-storey car block replaced with a more discreet garage. Permitted development rights would also be removed if the application was approved. It would be difficult to hard to add condition requiring that TPOs be added to the existing poplar trees; this would require a separate order and could not be made a requirement of this application.

Members discussed the report and made the following comments:

·       The proposal was a vast improvement on what was there currently.

·       Members were pleased with how the applicant changed the application based on communication with the Council.

Councillor Irving-Swift proposed and Councillor Hill seconded that the officer recommendation be agreed. The recommendation was put to a vote and declared carried with 7 votes for and 1 against.

RESOLVED:

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

Approved, subject to conditions

The Planning Officer presented the report which sought approval for the erection of a new bungalow to the rear garden of 266A Main Road, Duston.

Michael Megeary, the agent on behalf of the applicant, addressed the Committee and spoke in favour of the application. He stated that the proposal was fully supported by officers and that there were no objections from statutory consultees, except for Duston Parish Council, whose concerns included the driveway; however, Mr Megeary noted that the driveway had existed without issue for a number of years. He also advised that the applicant intended on retaining the trees on site.

Members discussed the report.

Councillor Irving-Swift proposed and Councillor Beardsworth seconded that the officer recommendation be agreed. The recommendations were put to a vote and declared carried with 8 votes for.

RESOLVED:

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

Approved, subject to conditions

The Planning Officer presented the report which sought approval for external and internal alterations, a single storey rear extension, internal re-modelling and refurbishments, new rooflights in the existing roof, and oak frame car shelter to the front forecourt.

In response to questions, the Committee heard that as part of a previous application, some maintenance works were carried out on the trees to the front of the property; the majority of the trees would be retained.

Members discussed the report.

Councillor Frost proposed and Councillor Hill seconded that the officer recommendation be agreed. The recommendation was put to a vote and declared carried with 8 votes for.

RESOLVED:

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

Approved, subject to conditons

The Planning Officer presented the report which sought approval for the demolition of the existing dwelling and construction of 4 detatched dwellings, carports, new access and associated works. The number of dwellings had been reduced from 5 to 4 following consultation with officers. There were no objections to the scheme from Highways or the Conservation or Tree Officers.

Miranda Rogers, the agent on behalf of the applicant, addressed the Committee and spoke in favour of the application. She advised that advice had been sought from Highways and acted upon, and that the proposal had been modified following talks with the Conservation Officer. She advised that the development was low-density and materials were in keeping with those used nearby. Parking would be located behind the properties and proposed visitor parking exceeded the minimum requirements.

In response to a question, the Committee heard that the number of proposed dwellings was reduced to ensure there was sufficient separation distance between properties.

Members discussed the report.

Councillor Irving-Swift proposed and Councillor Cribbin seconded that the officer recommendation be agreed. The recommendation was put to a vote and declared carried with 8 votes for.

RESOLVED:

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

None.

The Chair to advise whether they have agreed to any items of urgent business being admitted to the agenda.

None advised.