Babergh and Mid Suffolk District Councils
Democratic Services

Mobile menu icon

Agenda and minutes

Venue: Frink Room (Elisabeth) - Endeavour House. View directions

Contact: Committee Services Email: committees@baberghmidsuffolk.gov.uk 

Items
No. Item

108.

APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE AND SUBSTITUTIONS

Minutes:

108.1 Apologies were received from Councillor Dave Muller and Councillor Peter Gould.

 

108.2 Councillor Richard Meyer substituted for Councillor Dave Muller.

 

108.3 Councillor Paul Ekpenyong substituted for Councillor Peter Gould.

109.

TO RECEIVE ANY DECLARATIONS OF PECUNIARY OR NON-PECUNIARY INTEREST BY MEMBERS

Minutes:

109.1  Councillor Caston declared a local non-pecuniary interest in respect of application number DC/21/05669 as he is the Ward Member. Councillor Caston confirmed that he would not debate or vote on the application.

 

109.2  Councillor Ekpenyong declared a local non-pecuniary interest in respect of application number DC/22/00349 as he is a board member for Gateway 14.

 

 

 

110.

DECLARATIONS OF LOBBYING

Minutes:

110.1  Councillors Guthrie, Caston, Ekpenyong, Mellen, Norris and Warboys had been lobbied on application number DC/21/05669.

 

111.

DECLARATIONS OF PERSONAL SITE VISITS

Minutes:

111.1  None declared.

 

112.

SA/21/20 CONFIRMATION OF THE MINUTES OF THE MEETING HELD ON 23 FEBRUARY 2022 pdf icon PDF 511 KB

Minutes:

112.1  It was resolved that the minutes of the meeting held on 23 February 2022 were confirmed and signed as a true record.

 

Recorded Vote
TitleTypeRecorded Vote textResult
To vote on confirmation of the minutes of the meeting held on 23 February 2022 Ad-Hoc Carried
  • View Recorded Vote for this item
  • 113.

    TO RECEIVE NOTIFICATION OF PETITIONS IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE COUNCIL'S PETITION SCHEME

    Minutes:

    113.1  None received.

     

    114.

    SA/21/21 SCHEDULE OF PLANNING APPLICATIONS pdf icon PDF 33 KB

    Note: The Chairman may change the listed order of items to accommodate visiting Ward Members and members of the public.

     

    Additional documents:

    Minutes:

    114.1  In accordance with the Council’s procedure for public speaking on Planning applications, representations were made as detailed below:

     

             

    Application Number

    Representations From

    DC/21/06315

    Jane Challis (Parish Clerk)

    Chris Pitt (Objector)

    Councillor Rowland Warboys (Ward Member)

    DC/21/05669

    Jane Every (Parish Clerk)

    Chris Smith (Agent)

    Councillor James Caston (Ward Member)

    DC/22/00494

    Councillor Julie Flatman (Ward Member)

    DC/22/00349

    Councillor Dave Muller (Ward Member)

     

    115.

    DC/21/06315 THE SIX BELLS INN, HIGH STREET, GISLINGHAM, SUFFOLK, IP23 8JD pdf icon PDF 256 KB

    Additional documents:

    Minutes:

    115.1  Item 7A

     

              Application              DC/21/06315

    Proposal                  Full Planning Application - Change of use of the Six Bells Inn Public House to Veterinary Practice and pet supplies (sui generis). Business proposed to exist on the ground floor level whilst retaining the existing first floor ancillary residential accommodation.

    Site Location           The Six Bells Inn, High Street, Gislingham, Suffolk IP23 8JD

    Applicant                 Mr. A Whatling

     

    115.2  Councillor Warboys declared himself as the Ward Member for this item and confirmed that he would not debate or vote on the application.

     

    115.3  The Case Officer presented the application to the Committee outlining the proposal before Members including the location of the site, access to the site, the constraints, the proximity of the application to nearby listed buildings, the criteria required to approve change of use for a public house, a comparison to another local change of use for a public house application, and the officer recommendation for refusal.

     

    115.4  The Case Officer responded to questions from Members on issues including: the comparison to another local change of use for a public house application and the policies that were met, and previous applications for change of use. 

     

    115.5  Members considered the representation from Jane Challis who spoke as the Parish Clerk.

     

    115.6  The Parish Clerk responded to questions from Members on issues including: discussion within the Parish Council regarding a community owned pub.

     

    115.7  Members considered the representation from Chris Pitt who spoke as an Objector.

     

    115.8  The Objector responded to questions from Members on issues including: how long the public house has been up for sale, and what level the public house was marketed at.

     

    115.9  Members considered the representation from Councillor Warboys who spoke as the Ward Member.

     

    115.10 Members debated the application on issues including: supplementary planning guidance, the criteria required to approve change of use for a public house, the potential for a community owned pub, and the Six Bells’ status as the only public house in Gislingham.

     

    115.11 Councillor Meyer proposed that the application be refused as detailed in the officer recommendation.

     

    115.12 Councillor Stringer seconded the proposal.

     

    By a unanimous vote

     

    It was RESOLVED:

     

    That the application is REFUSED planning permission for the following reason:

     

    Notwithstanding the evidence submitted with the application it is considered that the use of the building as public house would provide a valued local facility which would support the needs of the residents and future residents of the village of Gislingham. It is not considered that the development would meet with policy statement 5.4 set out in the Retention of Shops, Post Offices and Public Houses in Villages SPG. No other public house is located within the village of Gislingham for alternative use by its residents, insufficient marketing has taken place to demonstrate that there is not an opportunity through selling the property to continue its use as a public house and no economic evidence has been submitted to show that the business could not viably operate from the site. Further, there is significant public  ...  view the full minutes text for item 115.

    Recorded Vote
    TitleTypeRecorded Vote textResult
    That application DC/21/06315 be refused as detailed in the Officer recommendation Ad-Hoc Carried
  • View Recorded Vote for this item
  • 116.

    DC/21/05669 LAND TO THE SOUTH OF, FITZGERALD ROAD, BRAMFORD, SUFFOLK pdf icon PDF 201 KB

    Additional documents:

    Minutes:

    116.1  Item 7B

     

              Application              DC/21/05669

    Proposal                  Application for approval of the outstanding Reserved Matters following grant of Outline Permission DC/19/01401- Residential development of up to 115 dwellings and access, including open space and landscaping - Details for Appearance, Landscaping, Layout and Scale required under Conditions 1 and 2 and concurrently required details of Surface Water Drainage (Condition 12); Landscape and Ecological Management Plan (Condition 15); Biodiversity Enhancement Strategy (Condition 16); Landscaping (Condition 18) and Housing Mix (Condition 22).

    Site Location           Land To The South Of, Fitzgerald Road, Bramford, Suffolk

    Applicant                 Mr. C Smith

     

     

    116.2  Councillor Warboys resumed his place on the committee.

     

    116.3  Councillor Caston declared himself as the Ward Member for this item and confirmed that he would not debate or vote on the application.

     

    116.4  The Case Officer presented the application to the Committee outlining the proposal before Members including the location of the site, the access to the site, constraints to the site, the proposed landscaping, the proposed housing mix, the proposed street elevations, the proposed amenities for the site, attenuation basins, the proposed material mix, the proposed cycle path routes, and the officer recommendation for approval.

     

    116.5  The Case Officer responded to questions from Members on issues including: the functionality of the proposed chimneys, the locations of triple parking, the maintenance of the proposed green spaces, design type 886, whether design type 886 can accommodate 300mm of floor insultation, the different types of proposed footpaths, pre-existing issues with nearby roads and footpaths, and the visibility of Pheonix House from the site.

     

     116.6Members considered the representation from Jane Every who spoke as the Parish Clerk.

     

    116.7  The Parish Clerk responded to questions from Members on issues including: the proposed alternative access to the north of the site and its potential impact on pre-existing issues.

     

    116.8  Members considered the representation from Chris Smith who spoke as the Agent.

     

    116.9  The Agent responded to questions from Members on issues including: sustainability provisions, the status of building regulation approval, electric vehicle charging, the target EPC rating, the functionality of the proposed chimneys, the allocation of proposed air source heat pumps, solar panels on affordable homes, how the proposed chimney brick slips will be adhered, whether roads will be built to an adoptable standard, and the maintenance of the proposed green spaces. 

     

    116.10 Members considered the representation from Councillor Caston who spoke as the Ward Member.

     

    116.11 The Ward Member responded to questions from Members on issues including: pre-existing cycle paths.

     

    116.12 Members debated the application on issues including: sustainable energy provisions, parking provisions, the 886 design type, the maintenance of green spaces, the proposed landscaping, the proposed cycle paths, the layout of the application, and the proximity of affordable homes to the proposed green space.

     

    116.13 Councillor Guthrie proposed that the application be deferred to review the parking, design type 886, cycleways, landscaping, footpaths, and non-functioning design details.

     

    116.14 Councillor Stringer seconded the proposal.

     

    By a unanimous vote

     

    It was RESOLVED:

     

    That the application is DEFERRED for the applicant  ...  view the full minutes text for item 116.

    Recorded Vote
    TitleTypeRecorded Vote textResult
    That application DC/21/05669 be deferred for reasons as read out by the Area Planning Manager Ad-Hoc Carried
  • View Recorded Vote for this item
  • 117.

    DC/22/00494 LITTLE MEADOWS FARM, BANYARDS GREEN, LAXFIELD, IP13 8EU pdf icon PDF 252 KB

    Additional documents:

    Minutes:

    117.1  Item 7C

     

              Application              DC/22/00494

    Proposal                  Planning Application - Demolition of existing barn and replace with 1no new dwelling as alternative scheme to DC/20/05665

    Site Location           Little Meadows Farm, Banyards Green, Laxfield, IP13 8EU

    Applicant                 Mr. and Mrs. Martin-Edwards

     

     

    117.2  A short break was taken between 11:25am and 11:40am after the completion of application number DC/21/05669 but before the commencement of application number DC/22/00494.

     

    117.3  Councillor Caston resumed his place on the committee.

     

    117.4  The Case Officer presented the application to the Committee outlining the proposal before Members including the reasons for bringing the application to the committee, the proposed amendments to the previously agreed application, the location of the site, the proposed design, and the officer recommendation for approval.

     

    117.5  The Case Officer responded to questions from Members on issues including: the height of the existing building, the height of the proposed building, and the receipt of any objections to the application.

     

    117.6  The Chair read out a statement from Ward Member Councillor Julie Flatman who was unable to attend the meeting.

     

    117.7  Members debated the application on issues including: the design of the proposed building, and Class Q.

     

    117.8  Councillor Stringer proposed that the application be approved as detailed in the officer recommendation.

     

    117.9  Councillor Caston seconded the proposal.

     

    By a vote of 7 for and 1 against

     

    It was RESOLVED:

     

    That authority be delegated to the Chief Planning Officer to GRANT planning permission.

     

    (1) That the Chief Planning Officer be authorised to GRANT Planning Permission subject to conditions as summarised below and those as may be deemed necessary by the Chief Planning Officer:

     

    • Standard time limit (3yrs for implementation of scheme from date of issue)

    • Approved Plans (Plans submitted that form this application)

    • Cycle Storage to be located within existing secured shed on site

    • Refuse and recycling bins as approved

    • Wildlife Lighting Strategy

    • Work in accordance with Ecological Appraisal Recommendations

    • Biodiversity Enhancements Strategy to be agreed

    • Removal of PD Rights (Class A-D)

    • Provision for parking provided prior to occupation

    • Visibility splays and no obstruction over 0.6 metres

     

    (2) And the following informative notes as summarised and those as may be deemed necessary:

     

    Pro active working statement

    • SCC Highways notes

    • Support for sustainable development principles

    • Right of Way Consent

     

    Recorded Vote
    TitleTypeRecorded Vote textResult
    That application DC/22/00494 be approved as detailed in the Officer recommendation Ad-Hoc Carried
  • View Recorded Vote for this item
  • 118.

    DC/22/00349 GATEWAY 14, LAND BETWEEN THE A1120 AND A14, CREETING ST PETER, STOWMARKET, SUFFOLK pdf icon PDF 438 KB

    Additional documents:

    Minutes:

    118.1  Item 7D

     

              Application              DC/22/00349

    Proposal                  Application for Advertisement Consent - Erection of 2No illuminated totem signs.

    Site Location           Gateway 14, Land Between The A1120 And A14, Creeting St Peter, Stowmarket, Suffolk

    Applicant                 Gateway 14 Limited

     

     

    118.2  The Planning Lawyer advised that Cllr Ekpenyong was able to vote and speak having made his declaration of interest on that basis that he had confirmed that he did not have any pre-determined view of the matter.

     

    118.3  The Case Officer presented the application to the Committee outlining the proposal before Members including the location of the site, the constraints of the site, the proposed illumination, pre-existing totem signs, and the officer recommendation for approval.

     

    118.4  The Case Officer responded to questions from Members on issues including: the proposed illumination and the height of the proposed totem signs.

     

    118.5  The Chair read out a statement from Ward Member Councillor Dave Muller who was unable to attend the meeting.

     

    118.6  Councillor Caston proposed that the application be approved as detailed in the officer recommendation.

     

    118.7 Councillor Ekpenyong seconded the proposal.

     

    By a unanimous vote

     

    It was RESOLVED:

     

    That the application is GRANTED advertisement consent

     

    (1) That the Chief Planning Officer be authorised to GRANT advertisement consent subject to conditions as summarised below and those as may be deemed necessary by the Chief Planning Officer:

     

    1. Advertisement time limit

    2. Approved plans

    3. Illumination restriction as SCC Highways and Environmental Health

    4. Standard advertisement conditions 1-5 to control safety, visual amenity, maintenance, and remediation on removal.

     

    (2) And the following informative notes as summarised and those as may be deemed necessary:

     

    • SCC Highways note

    Recorded Vote
    TitleTypeRecorded Vote textResult
    That application DC/22/00349 be approved as detailed in the Officer recommendation. Ad-Hoc Carried
  • View Recorded Vote for this item
  • 119.

    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.

     

    Minutes:

    119.1  None received.