Venue: Virtual Teams Video Meeting
Contact: Robert Carmichael - Email: committees@baberghmidsuffolk.gov.uk - 01449 724930
No. | Item | ||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE/SUBSTITUTIONS Minutes: There were no apologies for absence. |
|||||||||||
TO RECEIVE ANY DECLARATIONS OF PECUNIARY OR NON-PECUNIARY INTEREST BY MEMBERS Minutes: There were no declarations of interest declared. |
|||||||||||
DECLARATIONS OF LOBBYING Minutes: All Members declared that they had been lobbied on application DC/19/05956. |
|||||||||||
DECLARATIONS OF PERSONAL SITE VISITS Minutes: None declared. |
|||||||||||
SA/20/5 CONFIRMATION OF THE MINUTES OF THE MEETING HELD ON 28 OCTOBER 2020 PDF 260 KB Minutes: It was Resolved that the Minutes of the meeting held on 28 October 2020 were confirmed as a true record. The Minutes are to be signed at the next practicable opportunity. |
|||||||||||
TO RECEIVE NOTIFICATION OF PETITIONS IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE COUNCIL'S PETITION SCHEME Minutes: None received. |
|||||||||||
SA/20/6 SCHEDULE OF PLANNING APPLICATIONS PDF 145 KB Note: The Chairman may change the listed order of items to accommodate visiting Ward Members and members of the public.
Additional documents: Minutes: In accordance with the Council’s procedure for public speaking on planning applications , representations were made as detailed below:
|
|||||||||||
DC/20/03891 LAND AT BLACKACRE HILL, BRAMFORD ROAD, GREAT BLAKENHAM, SUFFOLK PDF 463 KB Additional documents:
Minutes: 28.1 Item A
Application DC/20/03891 Proposal Application under Section 73 of the Town and Country Planning Act relating to Planning Permission 2351/6 previously varied by 1755/17 for the variation of Conditions 20 (Proposed access road details) and 26 (Off road cycle route improvements) Site Location GREAT BLAKENHAM – Land at Blackacre Hill, Bramford Road, Great Blakenham, Suffolk Applicant Curzon De Vere Ltd
28.2 The Case Officer presented the application to the Committee outlining the proposal before Members, the layout of the site, the permission granted under the previous application, the requested amendments to the existing conditions, and the officer recommendation of approval.
28.3 The Case Officer responded to Members’ questions on issues including: the impact of Covid-19 on the work being undertaken at the site, implication of any further delays to the implementation of the Highways Works, the timescales for the completion of the highways work, the alternative junction to be used by Heavy Goods Vehicles whilst the new junction is being created.
28.4 The Senior Development Engineer for Growth Highways and Infrastructure responded to Members’ questions on wheel washing and debris on the highway.
28.5 Members considered the representation from Councillor John Field who spoke as a Ward member.
28.6 The Case Officer responded to Councillor Field’s comments regarding the time limit relating to the works regarding the occupation of the proposed units and suggested a time limit of 12 months as opposed to 24.
28.7 A short break was taken between10:29-10:34 to resolve a technical issue.
28.8 Members considered the representation from Nick Davey who spoke as the agent.
28.9 The Agent responded to Members’ questions on issues including: the end user on site, whether temporary signage could be used to request vehicles not to turn left out of the site, and whether any bollards could be installed on the access road.
28.10 The Senior Development Growth Engineer for Growth Highways and Infrastructure commented on the impact the upcoming SnOasis development would have on the surrounding Highways infrastructure and the proposed footpaths linking into the site.
28.11 Members debated the application on the issues including: possible traffic congestion in the area, and weight restrictions on the access road.
28.12 Councillor Barry Humphreys MBE proposed that the application be approved with the additional conditions as follows:
- Time limit of 24 months be reduced to 12 months in respect of Condition 20 variation. - To secure temporary signage to avoid left turn of the junction to be agreed and this shall include a reminder of weight restriction in the local area.
28.14Councillor Andrew Stringer seconded the motion.
28.15 By a unanimous vote
28.14 RESOLVED
[1] The application be deferred and that subject to an appropriate Deed of Variation being completed to the satisfaction of the Chief Planning Officer in respect of ensuring any new permission granted as a result of this S73 application and/or the concurrent planning application is/are tied appropriately to the original S106 Agreement.
Then
[2[ the Chief Planning Officer be authorised to GRANT planning permission for ... view the full minutes text for item 28. |
|||||||||||
Additional documents:
Minutes: 29.1 A short break was taken between 11:04-11:14 after the completion of DC/20/03891 but before the commencement of DC/20/01175.
29.1 Item B
Application DC/20/01175 Proposal Application for Outline Planning Permission. (Access to be considered) Extension to Port One Business and Logistics Park (as permitted under ref. 2351/16) and varied by ref. 1755/17), together with associated works including drainage lagoons, ecology mitigation and landscaping Site Location GREAT BLAKENHAM – Land Adj Port One Business and Logistics Park, Blackacre Hill, Bramford Road, Great Blakenham, Suffolk Applicant Curzon De Vere Ltd
29.2 The Case Officer presented the application to the Committee and outlined the additional information requested by Members at the meeting on 28 October 2020 when the application was deferred. The Case Officer outlined the application before Members and the officer recommendation of approval.
29.3 The Case Officer responded to Members’ questions on issues including: the location of any security fencing on site, the proposed fuel for the shuttle bus to be used on site, the conditioning of fire hydrants on site, the loss of trees on site, heating sources in the proposed units, and biodiversity issues concerning bats, newts and fauna.
29.4 The Senior Development Management Engineer Growth Highways and Infrastructure responded to questions regarding highways and traffic issues regarding the junction to the A14.
29.5 Members considered the representation from Nick Davey who spoke as the Agent.
29.6 The Agent responded to Members questions on issues including: the use of solar panels.
29.7 Members considered the representation from Councillor John Field who spoke as the Ward Member.
29.8 Members debated the application on issues including: traffic, the location of the site, biodiversity issues, the economic benefits of the proposal, and the lighting on the site.
29.9 Councillor Barry Humphreys MBE moved that the proposal be approved subject to the additional conditions as detailed below:
- Condition – The shuttle bus shall be electric unless other form of fuel/energy is agreed in writing by the LPA. - Condition – Fire Hydrants condition as recommended by the SCC Fire and Rescue Service - - Note – Lighting to be agreed shall need careful consideration to biodiversity interests.
29.10 Councillor Peter Gould seconded the motion.
29.11 By a unanimous vote
29.12 Resolved
|
|||||||||||
DC/19/05956 LAND OFF POST MILL LANE, FRESSINGFIELD PDF 4 MB Additional documents:
Minutes: 30.1 Item C
Application DC/19/05956 Proposal Outline planning application (all matters reserved) – Erection of up to 18 no. dwellings and associated new roads, infrastructure and open space. Site Location FRESSINGFIELD – Land Off Post Mill Lane, Fressingfield Applicant C.E. Davidson Ltd
30.2 The Case Officer presented the application to the Committee outlining the proposal before Members, the previous appeal decision and history of the site, the proposed revised layout of the site, the contents of the tabled papers, and the officer recommendation of approval.
30.3 The Case Officer responded to Members’ questions on issues regarding the housing numbers in the Fressingfield Neighbourhood Plan, surface and foul water drainage systems, that the application was not deemed as being isolated as defined by the NPPF, the response from the Highways Authority.
30.4 The Planning Lawyer provided clarification regarding the flooding issues and the weight that it could carry for members when deciding the application.
30.5 The Case Officer responded to Members questions on issues including: that the proposal before Members would not add any further surface water drainage to the foul water system but that the proposed dwellings would be connected to the Foul Water system and add to the existing network that caused floods. The Senior Development Management Engineer advised Members that in the Planning Inspectors Appeal report they had determined that there were no highways issues within the village.
30.6 Following the comment from the Senior Development Management Engineer, the Planning Lawyer advised Members that Planning Inspectors decisions were not binding when considering a new application on a site but that due weight and consideration should be given to them.
30.7 The Case Officer advised Members that he had been in contact with the Area Planning Manager during the meeting and confirmed that Members could condition the use of a private foul water treatment system on site to address the concerns of causing additional flooding in Fressingfield.
30.8 The Case Officer responded to further questions from Members’ on issues including: the Planning Inspectors appeal report and their comments on the neighbourhood plan, and the number of times that there had been floods in the village over the past year.
30.9 Members considered the representation from the Parish Council representative, Diana Warne, who spoke against the application.
30.10 The Parish Council representative responded to Members’ questions on issues including: the impact of the development on the Neighbourhood Plan.
30.11 Members considered the representation from Elizabeth Manero who spoke against the application.
30.12 Members considered the representation from Nicole Wright who spoke as the agent.
30.13 The agent responded to Members questions on issues including: the material considerations associated with the application, that there was sufficient capacity in the drainage system and that no storm water would be added to the foul drainage network.
30.14 Members considered the representation from Councillor Lavinia Hadingham who spoke as the Ward Member who spoke against the application.
30.15 Members debated the application on issues including: local housing needs as identified in the Neighbourhood plan ... view the full minutes text for item 30. |
|||||||||||
DC/20/01697 BARLEY BRIGG FARM, LAXFIELD ROAD, STRADBROKE, EYE, SUFFOLK, IP21 5NQ PDF 411 KB Additional documents:
Minutes: After the completion of application DC/19/05956 but before the commencement of DC/20/01697 Councillors Barry Humphreys MBE, James Caston, and Peter Gould left the meeting at 15:27.
31.1 Item D
Application DC/20/01697 Proposal Planning Application. Installation of underground “Ground Source Heat Array” and siting of heat exchange container. Site Location STRADBROKE - Barley Brigg Farm, Laxfield Road, Stradbroke, Eye, Suffolk, IP21 5NQ Applicant Rattlerow Farms Ltd
31.1 The Case Officer presented the application to the Committee outlining the proposal before Members, the layout of the site and the officer recommendation of approval.
31.2 The Case Officer responded to Members questions on issues including: the anaerobic digestor currently on the site, that further vehicle movements to the site would have to be submitted in a separate application.
31.3 Councillor Andrew Stringer declared a Local Non-Pecuniary interest in the application as a Suffolk County Councillor.
31.4 The Case Officer responded to further questions from Members’ on issues including: the ground source heat array, the vehicle movements, the current conditions on site covered by the Suffolk County Council permission.
31.5 Members considered the representation from Odile Wladon who spoke on behalf of Stradbroke Parish Council.
31.6 Members considered the representation from Steven Bainbridge who spoke as the agent.
31.7 The Agent responded to Members’ questions on issues including: the use of the barn, whether there was any connection between the ground source heat array and the barn and what the heat array would be used for.
31.8 Members considered the representation from the Ward Member, Councillor Julie Flatman.
31.9 Members debated the application on the issues including: the workings of the proposal and the functionality of the heat array, that Members did not feel that they had enough information before them to make a decision on how the proposal linked up to other facilities on the site.
31.10 Councillor Andrew Stringer proposed that the application be deferred for the reasons below: - For Officers to investigate and understand the intended energy use and what it would be applied to in terms of justification of the proposal in the countryside protected for essential use.
31.11 Councillor Mike Norris seconded the motion.
31.12 by a unanimous vote
31.13 RESOLVED
That the application is deferred for the following reason:
For Officers to investigate and understand the intended energy use and what it would be applied to in terms of justification of the proposal in the countryside protected for essential use.
|
|||||||||||
SITE INSPECTION Note: Should a site inspection be required for any of the applications this will be decided at the meeting.
Would Members please retain the relevant papers for use at that meeting.
|