Agenda and minutes

Venue: The Council Chamber, The Guildhall, St. Giles Square, Northampton, NN1 1DE. View directions

Contact: Email:  01604 837722

No. Item




Apologies were received from Councillor Irving-Swift (substituted by Councillor Millar) and Councillor Capstick (observer).


Minutes (of meeting held on 2 October 2013) pdf icon PDF 90 KB

(Copy herewith)


The minutes of the meeting held on 2 October 2013 were agreed and signed by the Chair.


Councillor Hadland stated that he had omitted to declare a personal interest at the meeting in any items which might relate to a site in Brackley on which he had advised a former client.


Declarations of Interest

·         Personal

·         Disclosable Pecuniary


Councillor Hadland declared a personal, non-pecuniary interest in item 6 – Proposed Main Modifications to the West Northamptonshire Joint Core Strategy as Submitted as he had advised a former client regarding a site in Brackley.  Councillor Hadland stated that he would leave the room if there was any discussion on that site.


Matters of Urgency

To consider any issues that the Chairman is of the opinion are Matters of Urgency.




Public Participation (if any)


The following speakers addressed the Committee on item 6 – Proposed Main Modifications to the West Northamptonshire Joint Core Strategy as Submitted.


Mr Patrick Cross on behalf of Whitehills and Spring Park Residents Association (WASPRA) referred to a planning application for dwellings on Buckton Fields in 2011, which Daventry District Council (DDC) and Northampton Borough Council (NBC) had rejected on traffic grounds.  Following receipt of a traffic consultant’s letter DDC had reversed their decision without any material changes, whilst NBC had again rejected the application.  In April 2013 WASPRA had made a submission to the Inspector voicing concerns about the inadequate provision of appropriate roads to support housing developments.  Mr Cross referred to some roads being at maximum capacity and some minor roads operating today at 47% more than projections for 2021.  He handed a report from WASPRA on this matter to the Chair and circulated a photograph to Committee members.  He believed that the minimum 20% modal shift shown in the Transport Schedule was too optimistic.  Mr Cross stated that the Joint Planning Unit (JPU) informed the Inspector at the April meeting that the M1 is really our north-west bypass, but still now publish plans for the delivery of a north-west bypass.   This, he believed, would lead to more traffic, including HGVs, in the north of Kingsthorpe.  WASPRA asked for a review of current and future traffic volumes by the appropriate authorities, including the Government, taking into account the impact of all proposed housing developments, commenting that the attractiveness of the North of Northampton for business investors and residents would be undermined if infrastructure was not provided before major house building.


Mr Michael Stead on behalf of the Friends of Boughton Area (FOBA) commented that the large scale housing development proposed to the north and west of Northampton should not be contemplated without a proper north-west bypass and comprehensive review of the traffic impact of all the projected Sustainable Urban Extensions (SUEs).  He stated that paragraph 162 of the National Policy Planning Framework (NPPFF) stressed the need to ensure the provision of transport infrastructure able to meet forecast demand and that the proposal for a north-west bypass or northern relief road as set out in the report would be inadequate.  He stated that the analysis and findings of WASPRA were supported which found that Boughton was being used as a “rat run” increasingly by vehicles trying to find east/west routes and to escape traffic jams on the A508.


Mr Robert Boulter on behalf of the Hunsbury and Collingtree Residents Alliance commented that the plan as a whole failed to address issues relating to the increase in car numbers, the need for a thorough assessment of flood risk for all the water courses that affect Northampton and the need for a new hospital.  He stated that the A45 was becoming too congested and that there were no plans to increase the road’s capacity and advice received suggested the road would be gridlocked within the life of the plan.  There  ...  view the full minutes text for item 5.


Proposed Main Modifications to the West Northamptonshire Joint Core Strategy as Submitted pdf icon PDF 301 KB

(Copy herewith)


An erratum schedule circulated at the meeting is attached, following Appendix 2 of this item.

Additional documents:


The Head of the Joint Planning Unit (JPU) stated that the Committee was being asked to approve the Proposed Main Modifications to the Pre-Submission version of the West Northamptonshire Joint Core Strategy (JCS), as amended by the Proposed Changes, for a public consultation period of six weeks between 14 January and 25 February 2014.  Approval was also sought for the Communication and Consultation Strategy which supported the Proposed Main Modification consultation.  He also drew attention to an erratum sheet tabled at the meeting, largely covering typographical errors in the report, and suggested a change to recommendation two which would authorise the Head of the JPU, in consultation with the Chair, to agree any changes required to the Proposed Main Modifications.


The Head of the JPU stressed the need for a JCS to be agreed for West Northamptonshire to provide a framework to assist the local authorities to resist speculative planning applications, particularly as the National Planning Policy Framework required local authorities to plan positively and thereby contribute to national economic recovery.


The Development Team Leader then explained the progress on the plan to date, summarised the Proposed Main Modifications set out in the report and drew attention to the background papers used in preparing the plan, as listed at the conclusion of the report.  She drew particular attention to the following issues:


·                The Proposed Main Modifications had arisen either through discussions and agreed statements considered at the Examination or as a result of the further work requested by the Examination Inspector;

·                All previous representations made in respect of the plan remained valid and are still with the Inspector for his consideration;

·                The period of the JCS had been extended through to 2029 for the reasons set out in the Committee report;

·                It was intended to have a further plan in the form of a Plan review that would potentially run through until 2036 and which it was anticipated would be adopted by 2020.


Councillor Millar stated that Daventry were receiving speculative applications and that as the National Planning Policy Framework favoured sustainable development there was a need for a JCS to combat speculative planning applications.  He referred to the need for infrastructure and to the general need for improved transport infrastructure. He stated that the people of Daventry supported the expansion of the town and wanted to take a fair share of the growth in West Northamptonshire.  He stated that significant resources had been spent by all partners, including the County Council, on reaching this stage of the JCS and that if the plan was not progressed those resources would be wasted and speculative development would be encouraged.  He proposed the recommendations, stating that their main purpose was to approve a six week consultation on the JCS proposed modifications.  Any feedback received following this public consultation would then be made available to the ongoing Public Examination, where it would be considered.


Councillor Breese stated that South Northamptonshire also had its share of speculative applications.  She endorsed policy E8 and the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 6.