Agenda and minutes
Venue: King Edmund Chamber, Endeavour House, 8 Russell Road, Ipswich. View directions
Contact: Committee Services - Email: committees@baberghmidsuffolk.gov.uk
Media
No. | Item | ||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
APOLOGIES AND SUBSTITUTIONS Minutes: Apologies for absence were received from Councillor Alison Owen. |
|||||||||||||
DECLARATION OF INTERESTS Members to declare any interests as appropriate in respect of items to be considered at this meeting.
Minutes: 26.1 Councillor Hinton declared a local non pecuniary interest in respect of application number DC/20/04615. |
|||||||||||||
PL/21/7 TO CONFIRM THE MINUTES OF THE MEETING HELD ON 14 JULY 2021 PDF 339 KB To Follow. Minutes: It was RESOLVED that the minutes of the meeting held on 14 July 2021 were confirmed and signed as a true record.
|
|||||||||||||
TO RECEIVE NOTIFICATION OF PETITIONS IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE COUNCIL'S PETITION SCHEME Minutes: None received. |
|||||||||||||
SITE INSPECTIONS In addition to any site inspections which the Committee may consider to be necessary, the Acting Chief Planning Officer will report on any other applications which require site inspections.
The provisional date for any site inspections is Wednesday ________.
Minutes: 29.1 The Case Officer presented Members with a request for a site visit from Councillor Derek Davis and gave a short presentation regarding application DC/20/03083 – Erwarton Hall Farm, The Street, Erwarton.
29.2 The Case Officer responded to Members questions on issues including: the built up area boundary, and the permitted development rights on site.
29.3 Councillor Simon Barrett proposed that the committee does not undertake a site visit. Councillor Peter Beer seconded the motion.
29.4 Members discussed the site visit and whether more photos could be obtained before the reporting of the application to the committee for determination.
By 6 votes to 4.
It was RESOLVED:-
That Members of the BDC Planning Committee would not undertake a site visit for application DC/20/03083.
|
|||||||||||||
PL/21/8 PLANNING APPLICATIONS FOR DETERMINATION BY THE COMMITTEE PDF 60 KB An Addendum to Paper PL/21/8 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: In accordance with the Council’s arrangements for Public Speaking at Planning Committee, representations were made as detailed below relating to the items in Paper PL/21/8 and the speakers responded to questions put to them as provided for under those arrangements.
It was 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/21/8 be made as follows:-
|
|||||||||||||
Additional documents:
Minutes: 31.1 Item 6A
Application DC/21/01460 Proposal Discharge of Conditions Application for B/15/01718 – Condition 8 (Design Code) Site Location SUDBURY – Chilton Woods Mixed Development, Land North of, Woodhall Business Park, Sudbury, Suffolk Applicant Taylor Wimpey London
31.2 The Case Officer presented the discharge of conditions submission to the Committee outlining the Design Code proposal before Members including: the cycle and pedestrian routes on the site, the landscaping on the site, the proposed heights of the building, and the officer recommendation of approval as detailed in the Committee Report.
31.3 The Case Officer responded to Members’ questions on issues including: the width of the cycle paths, the location of the recycling centre, Babergh Councils input in the design code, and the management of the green spaces.
31.4 Members considered the representation from Ruth Stanesby who spoke as the agent.
31.5 The Agent responded to Members’ questions on issues including: the width of the cycle paths, the communication with the Parish Council, and whether other development on the site would have to follow the design code.
31.6 Members considered the representation from Councillor Margaret Maybury who spoke as a Ward Member.
31.7 Members considered the representation from Councillor Clive Arthey who spoke as a Ward Member.
31.8 Members considered the representation from Councillor Jan Osborne who spoke as a Ward Member.
31.9 Members considered the written representation from the Ward Member, Councillor Elisabeth Malvisi, which was read out by the Governance Officer.
31.10 Members debated the application on issues including: futureproofing and sustainability on the site, whether anything could be done outside of the design code.
31.11 Councillor Peter Beer proposed that the discharge of conditions application be approved as set out in the officer recommendation.
31.12 Councillor Sue Ayres seconded the motion.
By a unanimous vote
It was RESOLVED: -
That authority be delegated to the Chief Planning Officer to approve and discharge condition 8 of the Outline planning permission B/15/01718.
|
|||||||||||||
Additional documents:
Minutes: A break was taken from 10:48am until 10:57am.
32.1 Item 6B
Application DC/21/02764 Proposal Reserved Matters application for Residential Phase 1 (matters relating to Appearance, Landscaping, Layout and Scale) comprising erection of 200 no. dwellings, residential amenities, open space, drainage, parking and associated development and pursuant to Outline Planning Permission B/15/01718 dated: 29/03/18 (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 energy centre); 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 Development To North Of Woodhall Business Park Sudbury Suffolk Site Location Sudbury – Chilton Woods Mixed Development to North of, Woodhall Business Park, Sudbury, Suffolk Applicant Taylor Wimpey London Ltd
32.2 The Case Officer presented the Reserved Matters application to the Committee outlining the proposal before Members including: the TPOs on the site, the proposed parking and cycles routes on the site, the proposed landscaping on the site, the contents of the tabled papers, and the officer recommendation of approval as detailed in the Committee Report.
32.3 The Case Officer responded to Members’ questions on issues including: the lack of bungalows on the site, the number of disabled apartments on the site, the maintenance of the landscaping, and the distance of the trees from the highways.
32.4 Members considered the representation from Samuel Caslin who spoke as the Agent.
32.5 The Agent responded to Members’ questions on issues including: when construction would begin on the site, the PV panels, the glazing of the windows, and the landscaping maintenance on the site.
32.6 Members considered representation from Councillor Margaret Maybury who spoke as a Ward Member.
32.7 Members considered representation from Councillor Clive Arthey who spoke as a Ward Member.
32.8 Members considered representation from Councillor Jan Osborne who spoke as a Ward Member.
32.9 Members debated the application on issues including: the location of the apartment blocks, the PV panels on the site, and the water efficiency on the site.
32.10 Councillor Peter Beer proposed that the application be approved as set out in the officer recommendation with the amendment as follows:
- ... be delegated authority to resolve the ambiguity between application documents regarding glazing and subject thereto to … to Approve the Reserved Matters ... and to add condition 4 to require compliance with the Energy Statement
32.11 Councillor Simon Barrett seconded this motion.
With 8 votes for and 2 against.
It was RESOLVED:
That the Chief Planning Officer be delegated authority to ... view the full minutes text for item 32.
|
|||||||||||||
DC/20/04615 LAND OFF LADY LANE, HADLEIGH, SUFFOLK PDF 2 MB Additional documents:
Minutes: A break was taken from 12:28pm until 12:41pm.
33.1 Item 6C
Application DC/20/04615 Proposal Outline Planning Application (some matters reserved, access and structural landscaping to be considered) - Erection of up to 45 No dwellings (including up to 15 affordable dwellings) (following demolition of three existing buildings). Site Location HADLEIGH – Land off Lady Lane, Hadleigh, Suffolk Applicant Place Farm Developments Ltd
33.2 The Case Officer presented the application to the Committee outlining the proposal before Members including: the access to the site, the proposed landscaping on the site, the site’s location within the emerging Joint Local Plan, the contents of the tabled papers, and the officer recommendation of refusal as detailed in the Committee Report.
33.3 The Case Officer responded to Members’ questions on issues including: whether there was any affordable housing allocation on the site.
33.4 Members considered the representation from Leslie Short who spoke as the agent.
33.5 The Agent responded to Members’ questions on issues including: whether any marketing had been done for the site.
33.6 Members debated the application on issues including: the timescale for marketing, and the sites proximity to existing dwellings.
33.7 Councillor Lee Parker proposed that the application be refused as set out in the officer recommendation.
33.8 Councillor Leigh Jamieson seconded the motion.
By a unanimous vote
It was RESOLVED:
That the application is REFUSED planning permission for the following reasons:-
1. The application site is currently allocated employment land in both the Adopted Development Plan and the Emerging Draft Joint Local Plan and has therefore been given strategic employment importance. Whilst the proposal is located in the BUAB and therefore housing could be acceptable in principle there is at present time no overriding need to allow residential dwellings here in order to make up any shortfall in numbers given that Babergh District Council can currently easily demonstrate that it has a 5-year housing land supply.
The applicant has not provided sufficient evidence to indicate that this site is no longer viable as employment land within an existing employment allocation. It is noted that the majority of Lady Lane Industrial Estate is still in active employment use.
As such the proposal is considered contrary to Local Plan Policy EM02, EM24 and paragraphs 81and 182 of the NPPF.
2. Whilst the application is outline only given the close proximity of the proposed site to the existing industrial estate and the issue of agent of change, the proposal would bring residential use much closer to the existing industrial estate and would potentially cause conflict between the residents and the businesses as a result of what may be seen by new residents as nuisance, disturbance and pollution coming from the existing commercial use on the neighbouring industrial estate. As such the proposal is also considered to be contrary to paragraph 127 of the NPPF.
|
|||||||||||||
DC/20/05137 LAND AT COBBOLDS FARM, IPSWICH ROAD, HADLEIGH, IPSWICH, SUFFOLK, IP7 6BG PDF 642 KB Additional documents: Minutes: 34.1 Item 6D
Application DC/20/05137 Proposal Outline Planning Application. (Access and Structural Landscaping to be considered). Employment land for use as Class E Business buildings up to 1900m2 and Classes B2 and B8 buildings up to 4200m2 Site Location HADLEIGH – Land at Cobbolds Farm, Ipswich Road, Hadleigh, Ipswich, Suffolk Applicant Mr Philip Munson
34.2 The Case Officer presented the application to the Committee outlining the proposal before Members including: access to the site, the visibility splays, the landscaping on the site, the public right of way through the site , and the officer recommendation of refusal as detailed in the Committee Report.
34.3 The Case Officer responded to Members’ questions on issues including: the permission of the neighbouring site.
34.4 Members considered representation from Leslie Short who spoke as the agent.
34.5 The Agent responded to Members’ questions on issues including: the infrastructure on the land.
34.6 Members debated the application on issues including: the use of the employment land.
34.7 Councillor Simon Barrett proposed that the application be deferred for the reason as follows:
- That the application be deferred. That Members are minded to grant Planning Permission subject to Officers reviewing and advising on policy CS2 issues and any risk issues arising together with any conditions and reasons that may be recommended.
34.8 Councillor Peter Beer seconded this motion.
With 6 votes for and 4 against.
It was RESOLVED:
That the application be DEFERRED. That Members are minded to grant Planning Permission subject to Officers reviewing and advising on policy CS2 issues and any risk issues arising together with any conditions and reasons that may be recommended.
|
|||||||||||||
DC/21/02577 CALAIS STREET DEPOT, PYKENHAM WAY, HADLEIGH, SUFFOLK, IP7 5ER PDF 371 KB Additional documents: Minutes: 35.1 Item 6E
Application DC/21/02577 Proposal Planning Application – Siting 3 No Storage Containers (following demolition of an existing building) Site Location HADLEIGH - Calais Street Depot, Pykenham Way, Hadleigh, Suffolk IP7 5ER Applicant Mr John Buckingham On Behalf Of BMS Public Realm Team
35.2 The Case Officer presented the application to the Committee outlining the proposal before Members including: the site’s location within the conservation area, the council being the applicant, and the officer recommendation of approval as detailed in the Committee Report.
35.3 The Case Officer responded to Members’ questions on issues including: the operating hours on the site, the demolition hours on the site, and the potential for more containers on the site.
35.4 Councillor Peter Beer proposed that the application be approved as set out in the officer recommendation.
35.5 Councillor Simon Barrett seconded the motion.
By a unanimous vote.
It was RESOLVED:
(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) • Approved Plans (Plans submitted that form this application) • Removal of containers should BMSDC no longer require the site/storage • Operating hours
(2) And the following informative notes as summarised and those as may be deemed necessary: • Proactive working statement • SCC Highways notes • Support for sustainable development principles
|