1 Uppingham Street, Northampton, Northamptonshire, NN1 2PG

1 Uppingham Street, Northampton, Northamptonshire, NN1 2PG — West Northamptonshire — Appeal Decision Site visit made on 13 June 2023 by G Dring BA (Hons) MA MRTPI MAUDE an Inspector appointed by the Secretary of State Decision date: 09 August 2023 Appeal Ref: APP/W2845/W/23/3314160 1 Uppingham Street, Northampton NN1 2PG • The appeal is made under section 78 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 against a refusal to grant planning permission. • The appeal is made by Mr Amarjit Atwal against the decision of West Northamptonshire Council. • The application Ref WNN/2022/0835, dated 5 August 2022, was refused by notice dated 13 October 2022. • The development proposed is double-story side extension with change of use to accommodate 4 self-contained flats. Decision 1. The appeal is dismissed. Preliminary Matters 2. The appellant provided an amended drawing (Drawing No. AD-01 Rev F) with the appeal, correcting a drafting error. On the original drawing (Drawing No. AD-01 Rev E) the ridge height of the proposed two storey extension shown on the rear elevation did not show a step down in the same way that the front elevation did. Revision F submitted with the appeal resolves this discrepancy, with both the front and rear elevations showing a step down.

1 Uppingham Street, Northampton, Northamptonshire, NN1 2PG — West Northamptonshire — Appeal Decision The amendment represents a limited change which corrects a clear drafting error. Given that the Council has been able to comment on the revision they are not prejudiced by me considering this revised drawing. 3. The Northampton Local Plan Part 2 2011-2029 (LP) was adopted by the Council in March 2023, at a time between the determination of the planning application and before the start date of the appeal. Both main parties have had the opportunity to comment on the implications of this newly adopted development plan, the policies of which I have based my decision on. 4. The appellant stated on the appeal form that the relevant parts of the appeal site could be sufficiently viewed in order to judge the proposal from public land. Health and safety issues about the condition of the building were also raised. 5. The Council suggested that it was essential for me to enter the site to assess the impact of the proposal. From viewing the submitted drawings in combination with the known health and safety risks at the site, it was not clear how accessing the appeal property would provide appropriate viewpoints, so clarification was sought from the Council.

1 Uppingham Street, Northampton, Northamptonshire, NN1 2PG — West Northamptonshire — Appeal Decision The Council confirmed that they would not object to the assessment of the appeal based on the photographs of the appeal site provided by the appellant, should I feel that there was sufficient evidence to make a finding. The appellant was consulted on this approach and https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate

1 Uppingham Street, Northampton, Northamptonshire, NN1 2PG — West Northamptonshire — Appeal Decision The Council confirmed that they would not object to the assessment of the appeal based on the photographs of the appeal site provided by the appellant, should I feel that there was sufficient evidence to make a finding. The appellant was consulted on this approach and https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate

1 Uppingham Street, Northampton, Northamptonshire, NN1 2PG — West Northamptonshire — Appeal Decision Appeal Decision APP/W2845/W/23/3314160 no comments were received. I have therefore proceeded to assess the appeal on the basis of the written evidence before me, the photographs provided by the appellant and a site visit where I viewed the appeal site and surrounding area from public viewpoints. Main Issues 6. The main issues are the effect of the proposal on: • the living conditions of the occupiers of 25 Harding Terrace with regard to daylight, sunlight and outlook in relation to the rear garden space. • pedestrian and highway safety with particular regard to on-street parking. Reasons Living conditions 7. The appeal site comprises a two storey corner dwelling with attached single storey commercial unit that is located at the end of a terrace of properties that run along the southern side of Uppingham Street. Directly adjacent to the south of the appeal site is the rear garden space that serves 25 Harding Terrace. 8.

1 Uppingham Street, Northampton, Northamptonshire, NN1 2PG — West Northamptonshire — Appeal Decision The rear garden space of No 25 is currently enclosed by the side elevation of 3 Uppingham Street along the western rear boundary, the existing two storey and single storey built form of the appeal property along the northern side boundary and by a single storey rear wing attached to No 25 along part of the southern side boundary. 9. The proposal seeks to replace the existing single storey commercial unit with a two storey extension. This would result in the replacement of the single storey blank wall and flat roof located along the significant majority of the side boundary of the rear garden space of No 25 with a blank two storey wall and pitched roof. It would sit slightly lower than the existing two storey element of the appeal property. However, it would result in a significant increase in the massing and dominance of the built form along the full length of the side boundary that is located immediately adjacent to the rear garden space. 10. Given the existing levels of enclosure of the rear garden space of No 25, the increase in massing and dominance of the built form along the northern boundary would be visually oppressive to those using the rear garden space.

1 Uppingham Street, Northampton, Northamptonshire, NN1 2PG — West Northamptonshire — Appeal Decision It would therefore be unacceptably harmful to the outlooks from the rear garden space. 11. I note the appellant has suggested that the rear elevation could be broken up with the provision of additional windows to serve flats 2 and 4, however, this is not shown on the drawings before me. In any case, this would introduce direct views from those flats into the rear garden space and would not alter the overall massing and scale of the built form proposed. 12. Due to the orientation of the development in relation to the garden that serves No 25, there would not be a significant change to the amount of sunlight or daylight reaching the garden area. The proposal would therefore not result in unacceptable levels of overshadowing when compared to the existing situation. Due to separation distances, intervening built form and boundary treatments, https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 2

1 Uppingham Street, Northampton, Northamptonshire, NN1 2PG — West Northamptonshire — Appeal Decision Appeal Decision APP/W2845/W/23/3314160 there would also not be a significant effect on the living conditions of the occupiers of other neighbouring properties in this regard. 13. Notwithstanding my findings in relation to daylight and sunlight, I find that the proposal would result in an undue increased sense of enclosure of the rear garden area of No 25 which would be harmful to the living conditions of existing and/or future occupiers. The proposal therefore conflicts with Policy Q1 of the LP. This policy seeks, amongst other things, to ensure that development is designed to promote and contribute to good placemaking. The proposal is also contrary to paragraph 130 f) of the National Planning Policy Framework (the Framework), which seeks, amongst other things, to ensure that developments have a high standard of amenity for existing and future users. Highway safety 14. There are currently no off-street parking spaces associated with the appeal site and none are proposed as part of the appeal scheme. There are concerns that the proposal would create additional demand for parking on the surrounding streets which would compromise pedestrian and highway safety. 15.

1 Uppingham Street, Northampton, Northamptonshire, NN1 2PG — West Northamptonshire — Appeal Decision Policy MO2 of the LP states that development proposals will be permitted provided that there would be no unacceptable impacts on highway safety and that the residual cumulative impacts on the road network are not severe. Part of paragraph 112 c) of the Framework states that applications for development should create places that are safe, secure and attractive – which minimise the scope for conflicts between pedestrians, cyclists and vehicles. 16. Policy MO4 of the LP relates to parking standards and states that ‘new development must meet adopted parking standards and have regard to the principles set out in the Parking Standards SPD’. The Council have provided the Northamptonshire Parking Standards (NPS) which they confirm were adopted on the 6 September 2016 by the former Northamptonshire County Council, which has subsequently merged with the former Northampton Borough Council and others to form the West Northamptonshire Council. Whilst not part of the development plan the NPS is a material consideration and is referred to by Policy MO4 of the adopted Local Plan, which has recently been through the public examination process. 17.

1 Uppingham Street, Northampton, Northamptonshire, NN1 2PG — West Northamptonshire — Appeal Decision The existing property is a three bed dwelling with retail unit at ground floor level and a commercial unit to the side. The NPS suggests that the current arrangement of uses would require 5 parking spaces. The Council have identified that the addition of the appeal proposal would require 9 parking spaces overall to be made up of 5 spaces for the four dwellings and 4 visitor spaces. 18. During my site visit I noted that there were quite a number of cars parked on the streets identified in the appellant’s Parking Survey but that there were a number of spaces available along Uppingham Street, Brook Street and Hampton Street. However, my site visit was during the morning period and can only represent a snapshot of normal conditions. It would be reasonable to assume that the situation would be different during the evenings when people are generally at home and not during the working day or at weekends. 19. Whilst I note St Georges Street and Mill Road are included within the Parking Survey, given that there are parking restrictions along parts of these roads, it https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 3

1 Uppingham Street, Northampton, Northamptonshire, NN1 2PG — West Northamptonshire — Appeal Decision Appeal Decision APP/W2845/W/23/3314160 is unlikely that occupiers of flats would seek to use these roads for parking overnight. Leslie Road is also included but this road is the furthest away from the appeal site and based on distance would be unlikely to be chosen by future residents. The likeliest demand for parking of any future residents would be on Uppingham Street or as secondary choices either Brook Street or Hampton Street, which are unrestricted and are a short walk from the appeal site. 20. The Parking Survey was carried out during the night, reflecting the time period which concerns are raised about. It identifies that Uppingham Street and Brook Street were at capacity and Hampton Street was nearly at capacity with only 3 observed spaces during the survey. Even if I were to consider that Leslie Road, Mill Road and St Georges Street would be used by future residents for parking, the unrestricted areas of these roads were either at capacity or nearly at capacity during the survey in any case, with only 2 observed spaces during the survey period. 21.

1 Uppingham Street, Northampton, Northamptonshire, NN1 2PG — West Northamptonshire — Appeal Decision Therefore, regardless of the amount of parking identified as being required through the NPS, the submitted Parking Survey indicates that at the time of the survey, parking along all unrestricted areas of the surrounding roads was at a level where residents would have difficulties parking close to their homes and where parking stress would be a cause for concern. Consequently, the increase in dwellings proposed would result in detrimental impacts on pedestrian and highway safety, through disruption to the free flow of traffic, conflict between road users and the potential for hazardous parking practices. 22. I note that the appeal site is in a reasonably accessible location, that any future occupants would be aware of the character of the area before choosing the appeal site as a future home and that some residents may choose not to own a private vehicle. However, it was clear during my site visit, due to the number of cars parked in the area and from the Parking Survey that it would be reasonable to assume that future occupiers would be likely to own cars. There is no mechanism before me that would enable any control over future occupiers as to whether they own a car or not. 23.

1 Uppingham Street, Northampton, Northamptonshire, NN1 2PG — West Northamptonshire — Appeal Decision There is an extant planning permission1 in place at the appeal site for an alternative scheme that would provide one less flat than the development. Whilst this would be a small increase on what has previously been considered acceptable, it would nevertheless represent an increase in the demand for parking where there is little or no capacity. 24. I also recognise that there may be less vehicular movements related to a dwelling compared with the current retail unit and commercial unit uses at the appeal site, if they were operational. However, parking would be for a more limited period of time in relation to these uses when compared with someone wishing to park outside their home whilst not at work or out for the day. 25. The appellant contends that the Council could look to rearrange the streets which would remove some of the barriers to vehicular movements between them. However, there is nothing before me that suggests that these works are planned or how this would affect the capacity of on-street parking. 26.

1 Uppingham Street, Northampton, Northamptonshire, NN1 2PG — West Northamptonshire — Appeal Decision The Council has raised a further planning application that it is currently considering at 17 Harding Terrace which is located in the vicinity of the appeal 1 Council Reference: WNN/2021/1106 https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 4

1 Uppingham Street, Northampton, Northamptonshire, NN1 2PG — West Northamptonshire — Appeal Decision The Council has raised a further planning application that it is currently considering at 17 Harding Terrace which is located in the vicinity of the appeal 1 Council Reference: WNN/2021/1106 https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 4

1 Uppingham Street, Northampton, Northamptonshire, NN1 2PG — West Northamptonshire — Appeal Decision Appeal Decision APP/W2845/W/23/3314160 site. Whilst I recognise there would be a cumulative impact on parking as a result of different schemes, given the road layout of the area, I have only very limited information before me to consider that alternative proposal. In any case, I have found harm in relation to the scheme as a stand alone proposal. 27. I therefore find that the proposed development would cause harm to pedestrian and highway safety in the vicinity of the appeal site, with particular regard to the increased pressure on on-street parking provision. The proposal therefore conflicts with Policies MO2 and MO4 of the LP. These policies seek, amongst other things, to ensure that there would be no unacceptable impacts on highway safety and that new developments must have regard to the parking standards and principles set out in the NPS. The proposal would also be contrary to paragraph 112 of the Framework which seeks, amongst other things, to ensure that applications for development should create places that minimise the scope for conflicts between pedestrians, cycles and vehicles. Other Matters 28.

1 Uppingham Street, Northampton, Northamptonshire, NN1 2PG — West Northamptonshire — Appeal Decision The proposal would re-use and extend existing built form, bringing it back in to use and in addition provide a number of smaller sized homes that would contribute to the housing supply in a more sustainable location. The proposal would improve on the current condition of the building and as a result would contribute to the character and appearance of the area. However, given the scale of the scheme these benefits would be limited and do not outweigh the harm I have identified above. 29. I note that there were no objections to the planning application from the occupiers of neighbouring or nearby properties and that the Council did not object to the overall appearance of the proposal. The appellant also asserts that the proposal would meet the nationally prescribed space standards and would provide appropriate bin and cycle storage. A lack of harm in these respects is neutral and weighs neither for nor against the proposal. Conclusion 30. The proposal conflicts with the development plan taken as a whole and with the Framework. There are no material considerations to suggest the decision should be made other than in accordance with the development plan.

1 Uppingham Street, Northampton, Northamptonshire, NN1 2PG — West Northamptonshire — Appeal Decision Therefore, having regard to all other matters raised, I conclude that the appeal is dismissed.

1 Uppingham Street, Northampton, Northamptonshire, NN1 2PG — West Northamptonshire — G Dring INSPECTOR https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 5