Venue: Council Chamber, Council Offices, Corks Lane, Hadleigh
Contact: Committee Services
No. | Item | ||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
SUBSTITUTES AND APOLOGIES Any Member attending as an approved substitute to report giving his/her name and the name of the Member being substituted.
To receive apologies for absence. Minutes: It was noted that in accordance with Committee and Sub-Committee Procedure Rule No 20, a substitute was in attendance as follows:-
Kathryn Grandon (substituting for Fenella Swan) |
|||||||||||||||||
DECLARATION OF INTERESTS Members to declare any interests as appropriate in respect of items to be considered at this meeting. Minutes: Councillor David Busby declared a Non-Pecuniary interest in applications B/16/01365 and B/16/01458 as he is a resident of Capel St Mary.
Councillor Peter Beer declared a Non- Pecuniary interest for the site inspection of Chilton Woods as he is a member of Suffolk County Councils Development Control Committee. |
|||||||||||||||||
PETITIONS The Corporate Manager - Democratic Services to report, in accordance with Council Procedure Rules, the receipt of any petitions submitted to the Chief Executive. Minutes: None received |
|||||||||||||||||
QUESTIONS BY THE PUBLIC To consider questions from, and provide answers to, the public in relation to matters which are relevant to the business of the meeting and of which due notice has been given in accordance with the Committee and Sub-Committee Procedure Rules. Minutes: In accordance with Babergh District Councils Constitution the following question was received from Mr David Watts as follows:
“I see that from the officer’s reports for the agenda items to be considered today that Babergh says that it no longer has a 5-year land supply of building land. What has changed that means that the supply has dropped from over 5 years to just 3 or 4 years – ie by up to 40% or more? What is being done to restore a 5 year land supply? And if a 5-year land supply is soon to be restored should consideration of the applications before you here today not be postponed until that 5-year supply is in place?”
Committee Chairman Nick Ridley responded to the question as follows:
“The main factors for the difference in the 5 year land supply are:
1. The relevant housing target- The Babergh Core Strategy (2014) adopted a “stepped” housing target approach whereby the annual target was 220 for the first 5 years of the plan (1,100 in total) and rising to 325 per annum in 2016/17 onwards (1,625 in total). When taken with undersupply over the last few years, this gives a new 5 year housing land supply position of 4.1 years, when judged against the Core Strategy. However, if the new Strategic Housing Market Assessment based target is considered, then the annual target for Babergh becomes 355 dwellings per annum, a figure of 3.1 years housing land supply.
2. The review of site delivery- Not all outstanding planning permissions can or should be assumed to be deliverable within the 5 year period. Recent experience has shown that it is necessary to undertake a site by site judgement of expected future delivery rates. The review has shown, amongst other things that delivery of new dwellings built in the district has not met the adopted annual target for the last 3 years consecutively.
The Council is already undertaking positive measures to improve the 5 year land supply position, which includes significant progress on the emerging Joint Local Plan and evidence base, working positively with communities producing Neighbourhood Plans, undertaking Council-led housing schemes, seeking to resolve issues that may be “blocking” sites from being implemented, and reviewing relevant planning applications where circumstances have changed.
The Corporate Manager – Growth and Sustainable Planning added the following:-
It is not possible to say when the 5 year land supply will be restored so each application will be considered on its own merits with reference to the guidance in the NPPF including paragraph 14, and also PP 9. Prematurity is not a ground for refusal and postponement is not good when trying to deal with applications in a timely manner.
Supplementary Question
Why is the number of 2320 dwellings not in the figures?
The Corporate Manager replied that a number of permissions are extant and/or not deliverable. The calculation of housing land supply considers permissions which add to supply and dwellings being built out which reduce it and involves a ... view the full minutes text for item 15. |
|||||||||||||||||
QUESTIONS BY COUNCILLORS To consider questions from, and provide answer to, Councillors on any matter in relation to which the Committee has powers or duties and of which due notice has been given in accordance with the Committee and Sub-Committee Procedure Rules. Minutes: None received |
|||||||||||||||||
SITE INSPECTIONS In addition to any site inspections which the Committee may consider to be necessary, the Corporate Manager – Growth and Sustainable Planning will report on the following application which requires a site inspection on Wednesday 12 July 2017, time to be confirmed:
B/15/01718 - Outline application (with all matters reserved except for access) - Erection of up to 1,150 dwellings (Use Class C3); 15ha of employment development (to include B1, B2 and B8 uses, a hotel (C1), a household waste recycling centre (sui generis) and a district heating network); village centre (comprising up to 1,000m2 Gross Floor Area (GFA) of retail floor space (A1, A2, A3, A4 and A5), village hall (D2), workspace (B1a), residential dwellings (C3), primary school (D1), pre-school (D1) and car parking); creation of new vehicular access points and associated works; sustainable transport links; community woodland; open space (including children's play areas); sustainable drainage (SuDS); sports pavilion (D2) and playing fields; allotments; and associated ancillary works. |Chilton Woods Mixed Use Development, Land North of Woodhall Business Park, Sudbury https://planning.babergh.gov.uk/online-applications/applicationDetails.do?activeTab=summary&keyVal=_BABER_DCAPR_113158
Minutes: The Corporate Manager – Growth and Sustainable Development reported that the following application required a site inspection prior to its consideration by the Committee. The Case Officer, Steven Stroud, gave a brief presentation indicating the proposed extent of the visit.
RESOLVED
(1) That a site inspection be held on Wednesday 12 July 2017 in respect of Application No. B/15/01718/OUT, prior to its consideration by the Committee.
(2) That a Panel comprising the following Members be appointed to inspect the site:-
Members noted that a site inspection would also be required for the following application:-
The visit was scheduled to take place on 26 July. The composition of the site inspection Panel would be confirmed at the meeting of the Committee on 19 July.
RESOLVED
(3) That a site inspection be held on Wednesday 26 July 2017 in respect of Application No. B/16/01092/OUT, prior to its consideration by the Committee.
|
|||||||||||||||||
PL/17/5 - PLANNING APPLICATIONS FOR DETERMINATION BY THE COMMITTEE PDF 405 KB An Addendum to Paper PL/17/5 will be circulated to Members prior to the commencement of the meeting summarising additional correspondence received since the publication of the agenda but before 12 noon on the working day before the meeting, together with any errata. Additional documents:
Minutes: Members had before them an Addendum to Paper PL/17/5 (circulated to Members prior to the commencement of the meeting) which included additional correspondence received from Sue Carpendale, Ward Member since the publication of the Agenda but before noon on the working day before the meeting, together with errata.
In accordance with the Council’s Arrangements for Public Speaking at Planning Committee, representations were made as detailed below relating to Items in Paper PL/17/5 and the speakers responded to questions put to them as provided for under those Arrangements:-
RESOLVED
That subject to the imposition of conditions or reasons for refusal (whether additional or otherwise) in accordance with delegated powers under Council Minute No. 48(a) (dated 19 October 2004) decisions on the items referred to in Papers PL/17/5 and PL/17/6 be made as follows:-
Philip Isbell, Corporate Manager – Growth and Sustainable Planning, referred to the context with regard to the 5 year land supply position as set out in the report and the advice in paragraphs 47, 49 and 14 of the NPPF regarding the presumption in favour of development. He also referred to the Government’s position on sustainable development as contained in paragraphs 18-219 of the NPPF which was consistent with deciding the weight to be given to material considerations and to boosting the supply of housing.
In response to a Member query, the Chairman confirmed that the two Capel St Mary applications before the Committee today would be considered separately on their individual merits. The Corporate Manger then responded to queries about the cumulative effect of proposals by advising Members that this was not the sole determinant, and reiterating that the reports stand alone.
The Case Officer, Gemma Pannell, then introduced Application No B/16/01365/FUL. Steve Merry, from Suffolk County Council (Highways) was present at the meeting to answer Members’ questions.
Following questions and discussion around the issues raised by the public speakers and Members, including highway/parking matters, housing need, the applicant’s odour assessment in relation to potentially adverse environmental effects, sustainability and use of Grade 2 agricultural land, the officer recommendation for approval subject to conditions was moved, with the inclusion of an additional condition to prevent inappropriate parking on grassed areas, but was lost on being put to the vote.
A proposal to refuse permission was moved for reasons relating to the unacceptable harm to residential amenity from the adverse environmental impact of the odours generated by the Mushroom Farm, increased traffic generation and insufficient health care provision ... view the full minutes text for item 18. |
|||||||||||||||||
PL/17/6 - PLANNING APPLICATION FOR DETERMINATION BY THE COMMITTEE PDF 573 KB An Addendum to Paper PL/17/6 will be circulated to Members prior to the commencement of the meeting summarising additional correspondence received since the publication of the agenda but before 12 noon on the working day before the meeting, together with any errata.
Additional documents:
Minutes: Members had before them an Addendum to Paper PL/17/6 (circulated to Members prior to the commencement of the meeting) which contained comments on the Case Officer’s report from Richard Kemp and John Nunn, Ward Members, and on behalf of the Parish Council, which had been received since the publication of the Agenda, but before noon on the working day before the meeting.
In accordance with the Council’s Arrangements for Public Speaking at Planning Committee, representations were made as detailed below relating to the Item in Paper PL/17/6 and the speakers responded to questions put to them as provided for under those Arrangements:-
RESOLVED
That subject to the imposition of conditions or reasons for refusal (whether additional or otherwise) in accordance with delegated powers under Council Minute No. 48(a) (dated 19October 2004) a decision on the item referred to in Paper PL/17/6 be made as follows:-
In response to a question from a Member, Steve Merry confirmed that the Local Highway Authority would not require a roundabout on the access road.
Philip Isbell, Corporate Manager – Growth and Sustainable Planning referred to the previous refusal of this application and to the context with regard to the 5 year land supply position as set out in the report, and the provisions of the NPPF. The Case Officer, Gemma Pannell, referred to the mitigation measures which included additional signage and the reasons as set in the report for the recommendation of approval. Members during their consideration of this application were aware of the extensive comments made on the Officer report by the Ward Members and on behalf of the Parish Council, which were also referred to during the course of the public speaking.
A majority of Members accepted the Officer view as set out in paragraph 181 of the report that the adverse impacts from the proposed development do not significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits of the development as explained in the report and agreed with the conclusion in paragraph 182 that the proposal is sustainable development in accordance with the three dimensions of sustainable development set out in the NPPF.
RESOLVED
That the Corporate Manager - Growth and Sustainable Planning be authorised to grant planning permission subject to the prior completion of a Section 106 or Undertaking on terms to his satisfaction to secure the following heads of terms:
• Affordable Housing • Open Space
and that such permission be subject to the conditions as set out below;
1) Standard Time Limit Condition. 2) Approved Plans 3) Development shall be implemented in accordance ... view the full minutes text for item 19. |