Members to declare any interests as appropriate in respect of items to be considered at this meeting.

Simon Barrett stated, for the avoidance of doubt, that when he was the Planning Portfolio Holder he had attended a meeting with the agent for the Stafford Park site and relevant officers (Minute No 113 refers) in his Portfolio capacity.

Peter Beer referred to a communication he had received from a local resident regarding the recent site visit to Stafford Park (Minute No 113 refers).  He had taken legal advice which was that he had no declarable interest in respect of this item.

John Hinton referred to the letter of 4 December 2018 from Strutt & Parker, Agent for Application No DC/17/04326/RES – Land at Bulmer Road Sudbury which had been sent to all members of the Planning Committee (Minute No 112 refers).

None received.

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.

None received.

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.

None received.

An Addendum to Paper PL/17/24 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.

Members had before them an Addendum to Paper PL/17/24 (circulated to Members prior to the commencement of the meeting) summarising additional correspondence received 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 Paper PL/17/24 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 Paper PL/17/24 be made as follows:-

The Case Officer, John Davies, in presenting the application referred Members to the Addendum which contained the responses received as a result of re-consultation on the amended plans, as referred to in paragraph 2.15 of the report.

In response to queries raised by Members regarding the details of the water feature, it was noted that this would be the subject of further discussion with the applicant in relation to the landscaping conditions.

RESOLVED

(1)       That the submission of Reserved Matters be approved subject to  conditions including

·            Approved plans/documents standard condition

(2)       That a note be added to the Decision Notice to advise the applicant that they are required to complete a Deed of Variation amending the affordable housing provision to the following:

·            4 no. 2 bedroom (3 person) social rented dwellings

·            2 no. 3 bedroom (4 person) social rented dwellings

The Case Officer, Gemma Pannell, in presenting the application, referred Members to a letter from Barry Gasper, one of the two Ward Members for Brook, which was attached in full to the Addendum. Members were offered reading time but indicated that this was not required.  Nick Ridley, the other Ward Member, informed the Committee that he would not be voting on this application.

Following a thorough consideration of the planning considerations as set out in the report, and the matters covered in the public speaking session, Members voted by a majority of 7 to 6 in favour of the officer recommendation. 

RESOLVED

That authority be delegated to the Corporate Manager - Growth and Sustainable Planning 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

·             Recreational Amenities Contribution (Stour and Orwell SPA)

and that such permission be subject to conditions including:

·             Time Limit Condition

·             Approved plans

·             Submission of reserved matters

·             Details of materials

·             Site levels

·             As required by highways

·             As required by SCC Floods

·             Details of fire hydrants

·             Ecological mitigation and enhancement measures

·             Detailed landscaping plan including all boundary treatment

·             Archaeological work and monitoring

·             Sustainability/Energy Reduction

Paper PL/17/23 previously circulated for the Planning Committee held on 22 November 2017 together with Addendum.

The Case Officer, Ben Elvin in presenting his item gave a resumé of the key points as set out in Paper PL/17/23 (originally circulated with the agenda for the Planning Committee meeting on 22 November and re-circulated with the 6 December agenda) and following the recent Member site visit.  His presentation included an additional slide to show the site in the context of the wider rural location and in relation to the County boundary. 

With reference to the Legal Opinion attached to Lambert Smith Hampton’s letter of 20 November 2017 (Appendices 2 and 1 respectively to Paper PL/17/23), the Case Officer advised that, bearing in mind that Babergh officers had not seen the brief given to LSH and had therefore been unable to test the legal advice given, his recommendation was that Braintree District Council be asked to take fully into account the ‘Polluter Pays’ principle and the weight to be given to it.  He confirmed that the Section 106 Agreement would provide for the remediation measures to be brought forward in a phased programme.

The Case Officer also clarified the position regarding Essex County Council’s highway requirements, which had still to be finalised, and confirmed that a developer contribution of £150k to ECC had been agreed.

Members were aware of their role as a consultee but considered that their input should be increased by having the Ward Members included in consultations on the conditions to be imposed on any consent to be granted. 

RESOLVED

That Braintree District Council be advised as follows:-

·             That had Babergh District Council been able to determine this application, the Council would, on balance, have been minded to approve the application subject to appropriate conditions and a Section 106 agreement.

·             That should Braintree District Council approve the application, Babergh District Council wish to be party to the wording of conditions and the terms of the Section 106 agreement.  Further, that conditions to be attached to any approval be agreed in consultation with the Ward Members for Glemsford and Long Melford.  

·             That all mitigation identified as necessary in this report to mitigate the impacts of development on the Babergh district, including those relative to education, highways, affordable housing and rights of way improvements, be secured through the Section 106 agreement.

·             That the Section 106 Agreement include obligations that ensure the delivery of the decontamination of the landfill site within the Babergh District area, having regard to the polluter pays principle.

·             That Babergh District Council requests Braintree District Council to ensure that a construction management plan is submitted which includes safety measures for the construction access and that conditions should be agreed in consultation with the Local Ward Members of Glemsford and Long Melford.